Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 30 Apr 1931

Vol. 38 No. 5

In Committee on Finance. - Vote 40—Local Government and Public Health (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion: "That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration." (Deputy T. Murphy).

Mr. Hogan (Clare):

The Government, if it has a policy, in so far as it affects urban districts and towns, has made very little impression on the housing problem in these places. In most cases the subsidies have not gone to enable people who live in insanitary houses to acquire sanitary houses at reasonable rents. Most of the subsidies have gone into the pockets of speculative builders, who have disposed of these houses for lump sums or let them at rents beyond the capacity of people most in need of houses to pay.

But even outside urban districts in towns that for a better name I will describe as rural or unurbanised towns, the condition of housing might be described, with no exaggeration, as shocking. You find in almost every town as you come through the country low-roofed houses, with small windows, no capacity for ventilation or lighting, and with no attempt whatever at sanitary accommodation even of a primitive kind. Yet we find that the boards of health have only constructed some 400 houses for these districts. If that is the only contribution the policy of the Department can make towards the solution of the housing problem in these districts, then the Minister must be said to have failed in making any attempt to solve the problem as it exists there. It is very difficult to give an adequate impression to those unacquainted with the country towns of the conditions under which people are expected to live in these towns. You may find a two, three, four, or five-roomed house an insanitary house. The census returns give us some information on these matters. We find in one particular county in the capital town, with a population of 5,518, the number of persons living in one-roomed dwellings is 238, in two-roomed dwellings 980, and in three-roomed dwellings 1,072. In another town, with a population of 3,345, we find 245 people in one-roomed dwellings, 597 in two-roomed dwellings, and 619 in three-roomed dwellings. In another town, with a population of 1,682, we find 52 people in one-roomed dwellings, 228 people in two-roomed dwellings, and 270 people in three-roomed dwellings. In another town, with a population of 1,202, we find 72 people in one-roomed dwellings, 238 people in two-roomed dwellings, and 198 in three-roomed dwellings. In another town of 788 we find 35 people in one-roomed dwellings, 332 in two-roomed dwellings, and 108 people in three-roomed dwellings. This, of course, gives only a very vague idea of the condition of housing in rural towns or unurbanised towns.

In the urban districts the Minister gave us some figures yesterday as to the extent to which he had tackled the problem. He told us of the number of houses built and the amount of money expended, but I do not think it can be stressed too often or too much that it is not so much the amount of money you expend that counts, or the number of houses you erect, as the number of families you take out of insanitary houses and put into clean, comfortable homes. That is the acid test of how you are facing the housing problem. Some people imagine that because you erect a certain number of houses you are making a corresponding incursion into the slum problem. Some people imagine that because you erect twenty or thirty houses you are necessarily taking twenty or thirty families out of slums and small dwellings in the cities and putting them into sanitary houses. You are not. The acid test of how you are biting into the problem is not how many houses are erected or how much money is expended, but how many families you have taken out of insanitary dwellings and put into clean, comfortable homes. That figure should be easily obtainable by the Minister. There are surely available in his Department some returns showing the number of insanitary houses in existence before the Housing Act came into operation and some statistics available as to the number of insanitary houses still unoccupied. The difference between these two numbers is the amount of solution you have produced towards a clearance of the slum and the housing problem. You may waste your money and energy without making much impression upon the slum problem.

It may be no harm to indicate what other people are doing towards solving the housing problem. There was no definite indication yesterday as to what the Minister proposed to do in reference either to cities, urban districts or unurbanised towns. Is it to be the same slap-dash effort, the same draughtboard policy, or are we going to have a policy by which it is possible to achieve something? Other people in the same period of time and with probably the same extent of a problem and the same resources have achieved a good deal in the solution of their housing problem. In Northern Ireland, with a population of something like one and a quarter millions, we find Sir Dawson Bates, the Home Secretary, saying on the 19th April, 1929. "Since 1923 no fewer than 15,643 houses have been provided for the working classes." In the same period of time this State has provided somewhere between 17,000 and 18,000 houses, not for the working classes, but for the entire community, which is a big difference. Lord Craigavon said in the House of Commons in Northern Ireland that he expected to have 20,000 houses built up to April, 1930. Northern Ireland, taking into consideration its population of one and a quarter millions, has practically done three times what we have done in the same period of time with our 17,000 or 18,000 houses for all the community.

Take our friends across the water. In Scotland, with a population of five million, they have built up to January, 1931, in twelve years, 134,717 houses. The boroughs of Scotland have built through local authorities 71,000 houses, and 15,000 have been built by private enterprise. In the counties in Scotland local authorities have built 19,000 houses, and private enterprise has built 9,600 houses in all, 115,000 built with State assistance and 17,000 houses without State assistance. England and Wales completed in 1924 109,000 houses; in 1925, 159,000 houses; in 1926, 198,000 houses; in 1927, 273,000 houses; in 1928, 166,000 houses; in 1929, 223,000 houses, making in all 1,270,000 houses in seven years. In these seven years the number of houses we have built is 17,000 or 18,000 houses. People may say there is no comparison. You may make the relative comparison of the resources of England and Wales and of this State, and the needs of England and Wales and this State, but surely that number does not compare favourably with the work done by our neighbours across the water?

In the matter of the cities, we find that Birmingham, with a population of 919,000, built 4,817 houses in 1926; in 1927 it built 4,849; in 1929, 3,278, and in 1930, 3,629. There is a clear indication that every year there is an increase in the building in those cities, counties, and boroughs across the water, while there is no clear indication here that we are advancing proportionately. In five years in Birmingham they built 22,956 houses; in Liverpool they built 12,843 houses; in Manchester, 9,940, and in Leeds, 3,383. That is how they have faced the problem and made inroads and impressions upon it. If we compare the two countries we find that there has been little or no advance made by the Minister or by the Department of Local Government in this matter. Deputy O'Kelly, I think, was quite right when he said that no appreciable advance will be made in solving the housing problem until the outlook of the Department of Local Government changes in the matter. There is no one-piece policy in the Department of Local Government in this matter of housing. I described it as slap-dash effort and draughtboard policy. It is nothing else, and could merit no better name. If we are to get rid of the slum or the collection of insanitary houses, whether in the city or the town, the problem must be regarded in the same light as a doctor would regard a cancerous growth in the human body. They must be cut out and finished with, and until the Minister takes that as his policy he will make no appreciable advance towards a solution of the problem. The Minister must be forced to realise that every human being is a national asset, and that it is the veriest hypocrisy to talk about equal opportunities or equal conditions so long as boys and girls are unfortunate enough to be born in the conditions that surround them in insanitary houses and in slum quarters. It is useless to talk of equal opportunities as long as these conditions prevail.

The Minister would tell us probably how he would face a menace to this State, or an attack upon this State. He would pool the resources of the State to meet it, but here is a menace, here is an attack upon the well-being of the State, and upon the future of the State and we have heard no well-defined policy from him as to how he is to meet it. I would suggest to him that he should consider it something into which no Party feeling should enter, that he should raise it from what possibly it is at the moment, and put it on a national plane, that he should try to face it as a national danger and meet it by a national undertaking, that he should put the credit of the State which the Minister and the President tell us is very high at the moment, and which I am always glad to hear is high, behind a National Housing Board, which would make such an impression upon the problem that possibly they would find it solved more readily than they think. I do not know whether the Minister is in favour of such procedure. I do not know whether the Minister thinks it is impossible for his Department, with all the other considerations that it has to undertake, to face this problem in its entirety, but I do believe that if he faces it as a national danger and endeavours to solve it on a national scale, he will find every member of this Dáil putting all the force he can behind him in endeavouring to solve it. Not alone will he find every member of this Dáil, but he will find every conscientious citizen in this State putting all the force he can behind him to meet it. Even if he considers it is too much weight on his own hands and that he should get a Parliamentary Secretary to deal solely with the housing question until it is solved, he should not hesitate to do so. If he is big enough and courageous enough to face it in that light he will merit and get the congratulations and respect of this generation and the abiding gratitude of posterity. I hope he will be big enough to do it.

Mr. F.H. Crowley

There are one or two matters that I wish to raise in this debate. Let me say at the start that I endorse every remark made by Deputy Hogan on the failure of the Minister to tackle seriously the problem of providing houses for the working classes. To all intents and purposes the Labourers (Ireland) Act is a dead letter in this country. It has not been availed of to any appreciable extent in the last seven or eight years, due to the high rate of interest and other conditions governing the fund. I hope when the Minister is drafting his new Housing Bill that he will take serious notice of the remarks passed by Deputy Hogan regarding the provision of houses for the working classes, and that he will at least make ample provision for the type of houses that would be within reach of the working classes rather than within the reach of the fairly well-to-do citizens.

Deputy Murphy last night, in a fairly able speech, pointed out the system of repairs to cottages that prevailed in Kerry. Whilst I compliment Deputy Murphy on his speech, I must certainly say that he knows absolutely nothing about the system that prevails in Kerry regarding repairs to labourers' cottages. The system that prevails in Kerry is more or less on the following lines: The Relieving Officer in the course of his journeys has instructions to report in case he finds any cottage in disrepair. Likewise, the rent collector has instructions to report, and the tenant himself has an opportunity of stating the condition of his cottage to the Board of Health. The Board of Health instructs the engineer to prepare plans and specifications, and in the ordinary course the repairs are carried out. I cannot make out why Deputy Murphy harped upon Kerry in reference to this particular matter. I think that the recent Board of Health can pat themselves on the back, because, when they came into office about four years ago, they found that the arrears of cottage repairs alone amounted to £13,000. That sum of £13,000 was a legacy handed down by the previous Commissioners. The Board of Health raised a loan of £12,000 and appointed a special engineer, and at the time they went out of office last September they had three-fourth of the cottages repaired and plans and specifications prepared for the balance. That is the answer I give to Deputy Murphy for the slur cast on the Board of Health regarding their system of repairs to cottages.

Before I leave that question of the labourers' cottages I should like to ask the Minister—I have already put this question to him on two or three different occasions in this House—if he is now prepared to make a statement regarding the scheme for the sale of labourers' cottages to bona fide labourers. The matter has been under consideration for the last three years, and I think twelve out of the 23 or 24 Boards of Health in the country have requested the Minister to prepare a scheme, but no progress has been reported. I hope that when winding up the debate the Minister will give the House some idea as to the progress made along these lines.

There is another matter to which I wish to draw the attention of the Minister, and that is the capitation grant for mental hospitals. Six years ago the Kerry Mental Hospital Committee sent forward a resolution to the Local Government Department pointing out that at the time of the passing of the Act governing this grant the capitation grant was based on the average cost of maintenance throughout the country. The average cost was then 10/- per head. That would leave the capitation grant at 5/—50 per cent. of that. Since the Act was passed the cost of maintenance has gone up threefold, but the capitation grant has remained at the old figure of 5/-. If I am not greatly mistaken it is something less even. I think it is a matter for the Local Government Department seriously to consider, whether it would not be wise to increase that grant and relieve the local rates.

Another matter to which I should like to draw attention is the administration of the money allocated for road grants. Any Deputy who is a member of a county council is aware that there is eternal warfare going on between the county councils and the Local Government Department as to the proper method of allocating the different moneys to be spent on the roads. I know at least that when I was a member of the Kerry County Council there was an ultimatum sent down every year from the Local Government Department, always about January, just before the estimates were prepared, that if they did not allocate so much for the main and trunk roads in the way of steam-rolling they would get no grant. The County Council of that area thought that the by-roads and the small county roads should have a fair amount of money spent upon them to keep them in repair and make them passable for the farmer.

We found that there was always pressure brought to bear upon us to increase our estimates along the line of expending what we considered too much money on the main and trunk roads, but if we failed to expend that money we were cut in our grant. I think that the Local Government Department should either take over complete control of the main roads and the trunk roads or else they should allow a certain latitude to the county councils in the allocation of the money. At present, I know that they are allowed very little latitude on account of the different ultimatums sent down every year.

I have repeatedly made a statement, in my own county at least, which has never been contradicted, because it is not possible to contradict it. When the sworn inquiry was held into the affairs of the Kerry County Council and Board of Health the statement I made to the inspector was that I could not for the life of me understand why the Dublin County Council was allowed £3,000 per mile for steam-rolling while the Kerry County Council was only allowed £1,000. Mayo was put on the same level as Kerry. What governs the allocation of the grants under that heading I do not know. The fact is that Dublin receives £3,000 per mile; Cork £2,600; and some counties adjacent to Dublin in or about £2,500. I do not know what the governing factor is in the allocation of these grants, but certainly I do not think it is just.

I should also like to draw the attention of the Minister to the allocation of the grants to the different Boards of Health. Five years ago, a Commission was appointed to inquire into the relief of the sick and destitute poor. That Commission published its findings two years ago. One of its recommendations was that the governing factor in the allocation of grants to Boards of Public Health should be the valuation per head of the population. That suggestion was one of the best suggestions put forward by that Commission. I think the Labour Party anyway should be one of the very first to agree to that principle. I should like to ask the Minister if it is his intention in future when allocating the different grants—I am not now speaking of the road grants, but of those for sewerage and water schemes, the upkeep of hospitals and other things like that—to take into consideration the suggestion put forward by the Commission that was more or less nominated by his own Department. I am not saying a word against the Commission. It was a fairly representative Commission and I think one of the best Commissions ever set up by the House.

There is also another matter—I do not know whether it is a thorny subject or not, but it would be unfair if I did not draw attention to it. That is the question of centralisation. I do not agree with the attitude of the Minister on the question of centralisation. I think he is moving too fast. If we look back we will find that one of the first bodies abolished in this country was the Dublin Corporation. You can take it as a coincidence or anything you like, but these are the facts. The Dublin Corporation was one of the bodies that criticised the Government. That body was wiped out. The next body wiped out was the Cork Corporation. They had the cheek to appoint a Republican Lord Mayor, and they were wiped out. The third body was the Kerry County Council. They had the cheek to appoint a Republican Chairman of the County Council and a Republican Chairman of the Board of Health. I think I am right in raising this question, because the Press have point-blank refused to allow me to raise it in their columns. I have sent letters to the Press criticising the action of the Government in abolishing the Kerry County Council which they refused to publish. I maintain that the abolition of the council is relevant to this debate in the sense that the policy of the Minister is centralisation, and part of that policy is the abolition of the County Councils. Within the last three months Ministers have been going round the country, and the inspired Press have quoted the reduction in the estimates given by the Commissioner in Kerry as a justification for abolishing further County Councils. The reduction in the estimate was given as £20,000. I say that the Commissioner, who sat as a Board of Health for the first time last November and who published an estimate in January, three and a half months after his first sitting in the county, had absolutely nothing to do with the £20,000 reduction, and that that reduction was as automatic as the ticking of the clock, because it existed at the time the Board of Health went out of office.

Of the £20,000 reduction, £5,000 was money which the outgoing Board included in last year's estimate for the purchase and equipment of a "T.B." hospital, so that that £5,000 is not a recurring debt. But that sum of £5,000 reduces the sum of £20,000 to £15,000. In 1924 the Commissioners who sat in Kerry under-estimated the amount for the Board of Health, with the result that the secretary three years afterwards raised an overdraft in the bank for £12,000. That £12,000 was never footed in reality by the Commissioners, but it was handed down as a legacy to the Kerry County Council three or four years afterwards. We were compelled by the Local Government Department during our three years to foot the bill of £12,000 by levying £4,000 each year. The last levy of £4,000 was paid last year. That accounts for £9,000 of the reduction in the estimate. I am now giving the figures that were sent to the Commissioners and that were checked and acknowledged to be correct, yet the Press refuses to publish a short article dealing with the matter sent in by me. I think there is something at the back of this whole thing that I cannot very well solve.

General Mulcahy

The Deputy does not expect me to answer for the Press.

Mr. G. Boland

The Minister will have enough to do to answer for himself.

Mr. Crowley

When the Board of Health went out of office in September a credit balance, in other words, a saving, for the first half of the year was put down at £3,000, and, in addition, there was an unexpended balance of £1,000, which was to be used for the construction of pumps and other works, but which at the time the Board of Health thought it might be better to defer, as they were not absolutely urgent. They were necessary, but not as urgent as it was at first thought.

Anyone who knows anything about Local Government accountancy knows that when you bring forward a credit balance of £3,000 to next year's account it makes your estimate not £3,000 better but £6,000 better. During the first half of last financial year we had a saving of £3,000 and an unexpended balance of, as I say, £1,000. That amount meant that when compared with last year this year's estimate would be not £4,000 but £8,000 better. I have now dealt with items of £4,000 and £5,000 and £8,000. That is £17,000 which leaves me with another £3,000 to deal with. I think it is only natural and reasonable to expect that if the outgoing members of the Board of Health in this first six months made a saving of £3,000 that the least we might expect from the Commissioner would be a saving of £1,500 which, in fact, he made, and that additional credit balance of £1,500 would by the same process of bringing it forward to next year's account give us £3,000. Now that explanation covers the whole £20,000. Since the appointment of the Commissioner additional funds had to be provided for the salaries and travelling expenses of two extra officials at a cost of £2,000. The Commissioner, as an offset to £2,000, had to cut down home assistance by £1,000. We would not have cut down home assistance by £1,000 if there was also to be a reduction of £400 in the sum for the treatment of the poor in the Extern Hospitals.

I would not have dealt with this particular subject here if I had been able to utilise the Press. I say that the Minister has not made any case for the Commissioner as against the county council. It is not because the county council that I happen to be a member of has been wiped out that I am not interested in other county councils. I am, and I say that it will be a bad day for the country when the county councils are wiped out. You may talk about bribery and everything else, but if you wipe out the county councils and remove the human touch, the connecting link between the administration and the poor, it will be a bad day for the country. I am not saying a word against the Commissioner in Kerry; he is a good man and seems to be a very decent man, but we are dealing here not with him but with the whole system. I have seen the human touch operate in local affairs. I have been at the County Home once or twice since the appointment of the Commissioner getting a few figures from him, and I am glad to say he did not refuse them. I certainly appreciate the way he met me and the readiness with which he gave me the figures I asked, but when I was up there I saw 20 or 30 poor people waiting in a queue for out-door relief. That is a rotten system. I am not putting it down to the Commissioner's fault, but the sight of these people gave me a lesson when I saw them there waiting. In the ordinary course these people would come to members of the county council or to members of the Board of Public Health and would put their grievances before them, whereas now they have to go before one single man, who cannot possibly interview them all.

There is just one other item which I forgot to mention, and that is £5,000 for the purchase and equipment of a hospital. There may be a possibility that the Minister will say that the County Council did not pass a resolution about it. I am not a bit interested in that. The fact of the matter is that £5,000 is levied on the rates and collected and it is there. And while that £5,000 is there why the Commissioner is asking for a loan of £5,000 I do not know, but I have my own belief about it.

Let me say in passing, on this question of centralisation, that when the Kerry County Council went into office they were faced with three things: first, that in 1924 the Commissioners raised a loan of £12,000 and placed it to the relief of the rates. The County Council, two years afterwards, had to foot the bill for that £12,000. That is the glorious way of administering the county—to raise a loan. That never appeared in the Press, but came out in the Inquiry. Why cloak the action of the Commission and expose the County Council? By all means expose these things when occasion demands, but do so on both sides.

In addition to that there was the fever hospital in Tralee, which cost £15,000, and which was lost to the County Council for some reason or other. Anyway it cost the ratepayers £15,000, and now it is gone for ever. Thirdly, there was the question of the arrears of work on the cottages which Deputy Murphy pointed out. The Guardians, in the years 1922-23, 1924-25, when the two Commissioners were appointed, made no attempt to solve the question of the repairs of the cottages, and that question was handed down as a legacy to the Board of Health, and they had to face it and to raise a loan of £12,000 for the repair of these cottages in their care.

I should like the Minister to give us some definite answer as to whether he can report progress in regard to the sale of cottages to bona fide labourers and as to whether it is his intention in the new Housing Bill to provide houses at rents within the reach of the working classes. I agree with Deputy Hogan that, with the exception of the cottages built under the Labourers (Ireland) Act, houses have not been built at rents which come within the reach of labourers. To all intents and purposes that Act is a dead letter.

Mr. Law

I have listened with a good deal of sympathy and agreement to the concluding words of Deputy Hogan's speech, because undoubtedly, while considerable efforts have been directed to the solution of the housing problem since the Free State was established, and while considerable work has been done in that regard, compared with what was done during the period since the Union when this country was under the British Government, it is nevertheless disappointing to find that so little progress has been made in one particular direction. I allude to that most difficult and distressing aspect of the housing question, the conditions of the slum dwellers, not only in Dublin, but in a great many other towns and, indeed, many of our villages. It is an exceedingly difficult question. There is no doubt about that. My feeling is that it is difficult for many reasons. It is perfectly obvious that it cannot be solved; you cannot even begin to solve it, without exceedingly generous State aid. That is so because the condition of people living in the slums is such that it is hopeless to expect them to pay anything approaching an economic rent. I am afraid that that is one of the main factors of the situation which we have to face and, as far as I can see, there appears to be no cure for it unless there is a complete change in the social and economic conditions of the country, a change which we may hope for but have no right to take for granted.

The second factor is that even though we may try to solve it, I very much doubt whether on present lines we will ever be able to make much impression upon the problem. The slum dweller is as a rule a casual labourer. In Dublin he is frequently a worker at the docks, and one of the conditions of his life is that he must live near his work. Even if you take land outside the city and build him a decent house, even though he can pay for it, I doubt whether he would be willing to move from the city. That brings one back to the question as to whether you can better his position where he is. It is for that reason chiefly that I have risen to speak. I would like to know from the Minister whether he has given any special study to the possibility of reconditioning old houses. I remember when I was for a short time associated with the housing problem in Dublin we got from architects some very interesting plans for dealing with groups of tenement houses and reconditioning them so as to form a number of self-contained flats. I am well aware that that matter presents a great deal of practical difficulty, technical as well as financial. I am well aware that, from the point of view of the idealist and the maximist, the reconditioning of old houses does not offer a very satisfactory solution.

I know all about that, and I know how strongly the late Dr. Cowan, with whom I was associated, fought against such a proposal—but the best is very often the enemy of the good, and while you are waiting for the ideal solution many generations may pass. I would like to know from the Minister whether he has lately gone into that aspect of the problem. I have been very much impressed by what I have read about the efforts of some societies in this regard, especially by that body which is doing such excellent work on a small scale, the Alexandra Tenement Guild, and also the efforts which have been made on a greater scale across Channel. I confess that I cannot help thinking that while we are waiting for the slum problem to be solved—it may, of course, happen some day on a large scale with new communications, garden cities and so forth—it might, perhaps, be well to give a little more attention to a more modest method of tackling the problem.

Closely connected with the question of housing in towns is that of playgrounds for children. I am a Dubliner, and I confess that it is a little sad for me, now in my old age, to find that things are just as they were in my youth. To-day, with the exception of Stephen's Green, there is really no decent playground for children on the south side of the city. I know that this is not the direct responsibility of the Minister, but I cannot help thinking that with a little more activity on the part of citizens generally much progress could be made in that regard. That is why I address my remarks more to the Dáil as a whole than to the Minister. The same remarks apply even to a greater extent to the north side of the city. I know that the problem is surrounded with many technical and legal difficulties, but I think that if there was a real, earnest desire to solve it, a great deal more might be done.

I hope that Dublin Deputies will forgive me for raising this matter, but, after all, the condition of our capital city is of interest to all of us, no matter where we may happen to live. I think that many of us were sadly disappointed when we read the recent announcement of the Minister that he could not find time in the present session to introduce the Milk Bill. I know that it will not be lost sight of, but I hope that the Minister will prevail on his colleagues in the Executive Council to find a place for such Bill before long. There are two other matters to which I wish to refer, but which are more concerned with country Deputies. The last speaker made some reference to the proposals made from time to time in regard to the purchase of labourers' cottages by their present occupiers. It is obvious that there are many advantages to be derived from that, because at present county councils obtain rents from such cottages which are not sufficient to cover even the cost of upkeep. There may possibly be advantages also for the tenant occupiers.

There is only one caveat that I would like to enter on that point. It is notorious that in many parts of the country there are people in occupation of labourers' cottages who are not entitled to be in occupation of them, people for whom, I feel quite justified in saying, Parliament would never have made any such provision. These people are at the present moment enjoying good houses at rents much smaller than those which people of the same class are paying for other houses and absurdly smaller than they would have to pay in the open market. If anything is to be done in regard to transferring these cottages to the occupiers, I suggest that before you transfer a cottage to an individual in occupation you should make sure that that individual is a genuine labourer, because it would be really intolerable after enjoying the benefits of occupation of these cottages for so long that these people should walk away with a further benefit of this kind and that subsequently we should have to come forward, in the same district perhaps, to provide State money to build cottages for the genuine labourers who had been left out.

We hear from time to time rumours of possible changes in local administration. That is possibly closely related to the question of local de-rating and we shall hear all about it later on. I do not propose to enter into it now further than to say that I was formerly a member of a county council. Many changes have taken place in the interval but I am given to understand that most of the active functions of the county council are now really discharged by boards of health. If that is so, and I understand it is not questioned, I think it might be worth while to consider a reduction in the number of county councillors so that the county councils and the boards of health should be brought to closer identity than exists at present. I do not see why in fact it should not ultimately be possible to readjust matters so that it would be unnecessary to maintain two bodies. I merely make that suggestion. It is not a matter with which I am personally very closely familiar but it has been suggested to me and I put it before the Minister for his consideration.

Sir James Craig

In the past I have been a pretty severe critic of the Minister, not so much as Minister for Local Government as Minister for Public Health. I have thrown out suggestions in the past that it was necessary that we should have a Minister for Public Health who knew something about public health. When I saw that was impossible, I suggested that we should at least have a Parliamentary Secretary who could deal with public health and who had a training in that subject. However, as time went on, I began to grow satisfied with very much less and I find myself in the extraordinary position to-day of being able to say a few words in favour of the Minister for Local Government and Public Health. One of the first speeches I made in this Dáil, possibly eight or nine years ago, was in connection with this very subject, when I made a strong appeal as I thought for improved conditions of public health, because of the most unsatisfactory conditions in which public health was at that time in this country. One of the things for which I most appealed was the appointment of county medical officers of health. I regard myself as being a person who does not fly into the air without understanding something of what I am talking about. I realised quite clearly when I was pressing forward this demand that at that particular time we were not capable of putting into office thoroughly trained men to fill every post as county medical officers of health.

I actually made the statement a few years ago when this proposal came before the Dáil that if I thought it was going to be used as a means of putting inefficient people into positions which they were quite incapable of filling, I would prefer to tear up the Bill and trample it in the dust. That is to say, I did not want to see the country put to the great expense of county medical officers of health if we could not get into these positions men who knew what they should do and did it, in other words, efficient servants. I recognised that it would be impossible for us at that time to do that, but I am glad to find as time goes on that we are making a strong move in the direction in which I wished. That is to say, we have now seventeen county medical officers of health out of a possible maximum of twenty-seven. I think those are the figures the Minister gave. I have grown to be easily satisfied and I am satisfied that it is better for us to wait until we have men to fill these posts rather than to rush men into them who are not capable of filling them. Therefore I sympathise with the Minister and I suggest to him that he should spare no effort to get these posts filled, filled by men who know their business and who are sufficiently trained to do their work.

I should also like to congratulate the Minister on the low death rate with regard to enteric or typhoid fever. That is due to better water supplies and better sewerage systems throughout the country, but at the same time we know from the discussions we have had during the year that there are many small towns, particularly in the West of Ireland, that are still in the most deplorable condition in regard to water supplies and sewerage schemes. I never can get out of my mind the statement made by Deputy Dr. Ward with regard to the town with which he himself is most familiar. It was an appalling state of affairs that he laid before the Dáil. I therefore press this matter as strongly as I can on the Minister, to encourage the commencement and carrying out of schemes for better water supplies, particularly in the small towns throughout the country. There has been an extraordinary change in Dublin. In my earlier years as a physician I had always two wards of the hospital, with which I am connected, filled in the autumn with cases of enteric and typhoid fever. I do not think that during the past few years I had a single case of enteric fever in my wards in that hospital. That, of course, means a very marked improvement as far as general sanitation, proper sewerage and water supplies are concerned.

I congratulate the Minister also on the effort he has made in the immunisation of patients in diphtheria cases. The opinion I hold with regard to diphtheria is, that if it were possible for us to get recognition of the disease in an early stage, with the use of anti-toxin, it is quite possible to have extremely good results. In fact, the results are so excellent when the cases are recognised in the first stages of the disease and treated with anti-toxin, that the treatment is sufficient, but, unfortunately, in the great majority of cases the disease is not recognised until the fourth or fifth day and then great mischief has been done in the absorption of the toxins of the disease. I do not want to talk too much science here, but I do say that when an epidemic occurs in a place, as it did occur in County Louth last year, it was an extremely good move for the Minister to suggest that the remaining population should be immunised. It is rather an expensive, troublesome and difficult business to get people to agree to it, but immunisation of the whole population where a case of diphtheria occurs, is an extremely scientific and useful procedure.

Now I come to one of my pet subjects, a subject which I treated at one time in a lecture to the entire national school teachers of Ireland—namely, the medical inspection and treatment of school children. I am glad to hear from the Minister that though this method of public health has not been pushed to the same extent to which it might have been pushed, still great and satisfactory progress is being made. It must make a tremendous difference. When you listen to the figures the Minister gave about the number of children who have been found with dental defects, throat and tonsil defects, you will realise how serious the position is. It is from the throat that a great deal of the infection arises in cases like rheumatism, which afterwards produce heart disease. It is chiefly from the throat or the tonsils that infection is carried into people who develop rheumatism and very often with rheumatism there is heart disease which remains for the rest of one's life. I hope, sir, that you do not think I am giving a scientific lecture.

I come now to the national schools. I made a statement on one occasion that it was a great pity when the bombing and burning of houses was going on that the bombing of the national schools did not take place instead of the bombing of more useful mansions. There is an improvement taking place with regard to the structure of those schoolhouses, but many of them are in a scandalous condition with regard to sanitation and ventilation. I pointed out that without a proper system of ventilation in the schools children are trying to learn under conditions under which no learning can be done. In the cold weather there is not sufficient air let into the schools. The windows are closed up and the children are breathing vitiated air. Naturally such children are not able to learn anything. We must remember that. We must give the children decent schools, decent heating in the schools and decent sanitary accommodation. These things are improving and they improved very much during the past year.

Deputy Law has touched upon a point on which I touched in recent years. He confined his attention however to the great need for providing playgrounds for the children of Dublin. In that he was not right, because it is just as necessary that suitable playgrounds for the children should be provided throughout the rest of the country, as here in Dublin. It is extraordinary how difficult it is to get anything done in that way. I am one of the Commissioners of Merrion Square and we offered to throw open Merrion Square to the public if the Corporation would take it over. They would not do so. In that way an opportunity was lost of allowing the children from the large area down to the river to have a playground there. These children at present have to play on the roads and streets and they are subject, every day, to the dangers and risk of being run over and killed by the traffic in the streets. There was a great change made because the lawn out here (Leinster Lawn) that had once been open to the children is now closed to them. As a set-off against that the Commissioners of Merrion Square offered to throw open Merrion Square for the use of the children. The Corporation said it would cost too much. On a previous occasion we offered it to the Board of Works and the Board of Works turned it down because they said it would not be possible to pay the amount of money that was already being paid for the upkeep of Stephen's Green. I say again that no money is lost that is used for improving the health of the people. That is a proposition that we should all have hammered into our heads frequently.

The next point to which I want to refer is that of the meals for school children. There is not a great increase in the amount available for that purpose except in the Gaeltacht. For years I think I have been urging this problem. I have been urging it in connection with the appointment of county medical officers of health. I see the difficulty in connection with the school meals for children. If it were possible to have a cooking kitchen in connection with the schools some people thought that this problem would be eased. At one time it appeared to be the idea that we should provide hot dinners for the school children. Now I want to say here that I have never changed my mind on this matter. I have been approached over and over again in the matter, but I have never changed my mind on this, that as far as milk is concerned, and brown bread and butter, we could get nothing better than these to give the children. Milk is surely cheap enough at present when the farmers are only able to get 5d. a gallon for it from the creameries. Therefore it should be possible to get some brown bread, if possible bread made from wheat, and some butter. I do not believe there is anything that could be given to the children that would be better than milk, brown bread and butter. Cocoa and all those other things that you hear so much about are all very well. We hear a good deal about their nourishing qualities. A lot has been said about beef tea and such things. These are very well in the winter. Such hot drinks would be of great service to the children in the winter but they do not compare with the food value of the things I have mentioned.

Almost the last question I want to say a word about is tuberculosis. The Minister alluded to the fact that many of those cases of tuberculosis were infectious. I am sorry if I have to go a little bit into this question, but I want to say that all people suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis who are expectorating are a source of infection. If these people are sleeping in the same bed, or even if they are in the same room with other people, they are certain to infect them. Not alone that, but the whole house or room becomes infected. It is necessary, therefore, that proper steps should be taken to render these homes immune from the infection and the bedclothing and the rest should be disinfected after the patients are removed. I do not want to say too much about that.

Many years ago a resolution was carried by the College of Physicians that the building of sanatoria was not a means of curing tuberculosis. I stand over that statement still. Sanatoria are only a means to an end. Sanatoria are quite useful in removing people from their own homes in the early stages and helping them to get upon their feet but if those people are sent back into the little rooms from which they came, and in which they first contracted the disease they are going to contract the disease again. They are either going to fall back into their previous state of health or to contract the disease afresh after having been cured.

Therefore, better houses must be given to the people if you are going to do anything to end tuberculosis. Housing is at the root of the whole problem of tuberculosis. To rid the country of tuberculosis what is needed is better housing for the people. That leads me then to what Deputy Law has touched upon, namely, the slum condition of Dublin. Not a day passes that one is not confronted with an extraordinary condition of affairs in Dublin. The poor people are asked to pay 8/-, 10/- or 12/- for a single room. They are herded together in single rooms by people who demand these high rents. I do not know who are these wretches who own the slums. It is one of the greatest scandals in the City of Dublin. The unfortunate people are charged most exorbitant rents for the poorest accommodation it is possible to give. Deputy Law said that the people generally were not able to pay what is called an economic rent. We find these poor people mulcted to the extent of 10/- or 12/- a week. A charwoman pays 8/6 for a small room that you would scarcely put a cat in. We are allowing that to go on. I want to raise my voice in strong protest against those conditions. We must get better accommodation for the people. If we could get hold of the landlords of slum property in Dublin I, for one, would like to see them all strung up on ropes in the Phoenix Park. The existing condition of affairs is most disgraceful.

I am glad to see that more money is being spent on the treatment of tuberculosis. The treatment of that disease will not end with the erection of sanatoria. We will have to do something more for the people than sending them back from sanatoria to the accommodation in which they contracted their illness. I am glad to observe that, as far as the death rate from tuberculosis is concerned, we have reached the lowest figure yet obtained—1.32. It is not so very many years ago since the death rate was practically double that. There is a tremendous improvement taking place in that direction. Deputy Law also alluded to the necessity for providing clean milk. That is a very difficult matter with which to deal.

An Ceann Comhairle

And it requires legislation, I take it.

Sir James Craig

I was going to treat the matter from the point of view of tuberculosis only. Perhaps I will be allowed to do so. A great deal of the tuberculosis prevalent is what is known as bovine tuberculosis. There are variations, such as peritonitis. The particular form of tuberculosis which is most prevalent is got from the drinking of milk infected with tuberculosis. We can easily set ourselves against that without any legislation. We can insist upon the milk being purified and upon the dairy cows being treated with tuberculin. I hope the Minister will be able to deal with this matter at a future time. I am aware of the difficulties connected with it. The difficulties of introducing legislation in connection with this matter are very great, but I am sure that will not deter the Minister from taking action when he has got some of his other problems solved.

I have always maintained that the prime need in this country is better housing, and I am prepared to give every support to the Minister when he brings forward measures for the better housing of the people. I did not rise to offer any criticism to the Minister. I really congratulate him on the improvements that are gradually taking place in public health services. I am glad to see that he is spending a good deal more money on social services, because that goes for the good of the people.

Mr. H. Broderick

Quite a lot has been said about the erection of houses for the working classes. I do not want to deal with that matter in detail, but yet I would like to make a few observations in connection with it. I want to protest strongly against the unnecessary delay on the part of the Minister and the officials of his Department in dealing with schemes for the erection of houses submitted by local authorities. The delay is really grave, and to my mind wholly unnecessary. I must protest against the policy of the Minister in dictating to local authorities the type of house they ought to build and the material with which they should construct houses. The Minister seems to have got concrete on the brain. I know one local authority that has prepared schemes for the erection of working-class houses. They were anxious to build houses with brick but, for the sake of 6d. a week in the rent, the Minister turned down the proposal to construct the buildings with brick and ordered that they should be built in concrete. Has the Minister taken into consideration the fact that if these and other houses were built with brick it would mean great advantage to the brick-making industry, which is carried on in the part of the country where I reside? I heard a number of people who are supposed to be good judges say that the brick house is a far better house than the concrete house.

General Mulcahy

The Deputy should talk to Deputy Coburn about bricks.

Mr. Good

The Deputy is quite right.

Mr. Broderick

For the past seven or eight years the Westmeath County Board of Health have been anxious to establish a tuberculosis hospital in that county. The Department of Local Government and Public Health approved of the establishment of the hospital. The Board of Health negotiated with a number of people for the purpose of securing a suitable place and eventually they decided upon a particular mansion. The Minister's medical officials and the engineers approved of this particular mansion and they considered it was a very desirable place to be converted into a tuberculosis hospital. The question of the price was entered upon between the owner and the Board of Health some months ago. The matter has been protracted to such an extent that I have been wondering if the people down there will ever have a tuberculosis hospital. We have a medical officer of health in that county. Nothing has been heard from the Department for a considerable time upon the subject of the proposed hospital. I hope the Minister will direct his special attention to this subject because it is an important one for the people of Westmeath. Perhaps he may have some information to give the Board of Health which meets at Mullingar next Monday. A hospital of the type I have referred to is, I regret to say, very necessary down there.

I would like to make reference to a certain class of patients who are treated in the district hospitals. I refer to people who suffer from a disease that eventually becomes chronic. It is the practice of the Department of Local Government and Public Health that if the friends or relatives are not able to take patients out of the district hospitals and look after them at home, these people are sent on to the county homes. They are treated as paupers all for the sake of what the Minister calls "economy." If that were done under the British régime by the then Local Government Board I am sure we would have a loud outcry from all over the country against the un-Christian practice of sending those patients to the county home instead of allowing them to be treated in the district hospitals.

I would like to refer to the disgraceful treatment meted out to the attendants in county and district hospitals. These attendants hold pensionable positions but they are liable to lose their posts through infirmity. If they have under ten years' service, there is nothing allowed by way of compensation or gratuity to those people. They are thrown out. I dare say to remedy that matter would necessitate amending existing legislation, but it must be agreed that these people are in a position of hardship by not being allowed some compensation once they are thrown out of employment. I have one case in mind and in that case nothing has been done for the unfortunate person concerned. I think such a condition of things is a disgrace. I would ask the Minister to consider carefully the matters that I have reminded him of. I hope he will be able to bring in an amending Bill to the Local Government Act of 1925 to enable people of the class I have spoken of to be treated as they ought to be. If they had not been in pensionable positions their national health insurance cards would have been stamped for them so that when they became ill they would be able to draw sickness benefit. They cannot do that now with the result that they find themselves, so to speak, thrown on the scrap-heap. I hope the Minister will give attention to those matters and have them remedied.

Mr. Briscoe

The Minister for Local Government and Public Health is the policy-framing force for his Department. If one tries to make a study of the intercourse that exists between the Minister and his Department and local bodies throughout the country one should never lose sight of the fact that at one time he was Minister for War and Minister for Defence. He treats this whole subject of public health in the same manner as a general would treat an army and all the elements that go to make up an army. As Deputy Hogan pointed out, he has absolutely no sympathy with the people over whose destinies and future he has control, nor is he in touch with the existing situation. It is all very well to study economy from the point of view of pounds, shillings and pence, but as a number of Deputies have pointed out a great deal more could be effected if prevention were studied rather than the economy of pounds, shillings and pence in the maintenance of those amongst us who are less fortunate in the possession of this world's goods or as regards their health and sanity.

[An Leas-Cheann Comhairle took the Chair.]

I would like to give a few illustrations of the type of mind members of local authorities have to deal with when dealing with the Minister. Take the case of the Grangegorman and Portrane Joint Mental Hospitals. In these hospitals you have 3,750 people, chiefly lunatic poor. Both institutions are, I should say, the best managed and best run of their kind in Europe. The records show that. The inmates are well cared for. But think of the position! We have one dentist to look after these 3,750 patients. When the Joint Board was re-established after the exodus of the Minister's Commissioners, we discovered that this dentist had the princely salary of £100 per annum for his part-time job. That is what he receives for looking after that number of patients, half of whom are in Grangegorman and the other half in Portrane. The Committee, which is representative of all sections in the community, including representatives of the Minister's own party, were unanimous in recommending that the dentist's salary be increased by £50 per annum until he reached a maximum of £200. The Minister turned down the proposal. It should be pointed out that when the dentist's salary was fixed at £100 some years ago the population of both institutions was far less than it is to-day. The recommendation was turned down by the Minister in spite of the fact that one of his own inspectors, in his annual report on mental hospitals, in referring to Grangegorman, made the following record: "The dental needs of the patients receive due attention." That was the tribute that he paid to the work done by the dentist. The Minister knows the class of patients that we have in these institutions, that so far as being able to explain their needs and requirements they are very like children. The fact that the patients are of that class shows the great need there is for having a tactful officer as dentist to deal with them to see that their needs are treated in a proper way.

I would like to deal with this matter from another angle. We have it on record that the number of discharges from mental homes of cured or recovered cases amounts to 33? per cent. of the total number of admissions in the year. Therefore, I hold that the Minister's attitude amounts to this, that he wants us to send out from the institution recovered patients whose teeth have not been properly looked after. The Committee feel that while these people are under their care it is up to them to see that they are given the best possible care and treatment in every way. If they are to get proper treatment it is essential that their teeth should be looked after. The Minister in his usual niggardly manner turns down the Committee's recommendation to give this professional man an increase of £50 a year.

Let me turn to another matter, by way of comparison, as regards the Minister's action in this case. One of the last recommendations made by the Dublin Commissioners before they went out of office, was to give an increase of £50 a year to the superintendent in the Dublin abattoir, a man already in receipt of £600 a year. The Minister allowed that, but the dentist in charge of 3,750 patients in these mental hospitals is expected to carry on his important work on a salary of £100 a year. Not only did the Committee unanimously agree to increase the dentist's salary by £50 a year, but they sent, I understand, a deputation to the Department to discuss the matter. The deputation met with no favourable result.

There is another matter I wish to refer to in order to show the peculiar outlook of the Minister. Members of the Dáil and, I am sure, all right-thinking citizens, agree that every possible step should be taken with a view to eradicating disease in its various forms, diseases such as tuberculosis, insanity, and so on. In the two institutions with which I am dealing we have a number of doctors. They all get a short annual leave. To meet the situation created by the absence of the permanent doctors on leave, the Committee take on a temporary doctor for eight months of the year. The Committee felt that if, instead of engaging a temporary doctor for eight months of the year, they could get an additional permanent doctor who would also act as pathologist, it would be of great advantage to these institutions.

The cost of the permanent appointment would simply be equivalent to the difference between the eight months salary paid to the temporary doctor and a full year's salary. There would, however, be the great advantage in having a permanent doctor who was also a pathologist by reason of the fact that he could undertake research work in the institution with a view to finding out how best to cure certain diseases which are curable. Such research work would be of enormous benefit in institutions such as these. The extra cost of the additional doctor would not, as I have pointed out, be very much, especially when it is taken into account that the upkeep of these institutions involves an annual charge of a quarter of a million pounds. That proposal was also turned down. The doctor concerned is evidently a man of humane feelings for he has volunteered to do research work in pathology in these institutions free of charge, and so that his studies would not be interrupted.

I only mention these matters to show how unreasonably rigid the Minister can sometimes be, and how reasonable he can be in other cases where the extra expense involved does no good whatever to the community except to the individual who receives an increase. The Minister, and also Deputy Sir James Craig, referred to the county medical officers of health. It is all very well to appoint county medical officers of health at salaries of £800 per year, but the Minister knows that in certain areas the recommendations of dispensary doctors cannot be put into effect because the money to do so is not there or will not be provided. If the small recommendations made in dispensary areas are not attended to, I wonder how the recommendations of the county medical officers of health are going to be put into effect, or are we to take it that something is going to be done in the direction of providing what the dispensary doctors have been shouting for for years.

In a report of a conference of the Irish Asylum Committees, held at the Richmond Asylum boardroom in November, 1903, one of the causes given for lunacy in this country was the destitution and the means of living of some of the people. If he does not already know it may interest the Minister when I tell him that in 1847 when the population of this country was over eight millions the number of registered lunatics was 6,000; when our population had fallen to 5,400,000 in 1874 the number of registered lunatics had increased to 10,000; in 1899 when the population of all Ireland was four-and-a-half millions the number of registered lunatics had increased to 20,000. Now when we have not four millions in the Twenty-Six Counties the number of registered lunatics is 20,000, not counting those who are in private institutions that are not maintained by the rates. The Minister knows that the rate of admission is increasing from year to year, and he knows that the causes are due to depression, owing to the bad conditions that exist, yet his Department, that on the one hand deals with local government and with improving the condition of the people, and also the public health, does not seem to put one factor alongside the other in order to lessen, if it can be done, an increase in disease.

It is all very well for Deputies to get up and talk about the slum dwellers, as if they were a different class, forgetting that most of the people who live in the slums have the same feelings as ourselves. It is the duty of Deputies to look after those who are not represented here, just as we would expect, if we were in the slums, they would look after us and work for the elimination of the slums. The Minister seems to feel that he can control every single thing a local body does, that a local body must not take any action without first getting confirmation from the Minister's Department. A local body, like the one referred to, must not spend £50, although they are dealing with a quarter of a million of the people's money, without first getting the sanction of the Minister. On the other hand, when I raised a question here about the administration of poor relief the Minister stated that he would refuse to function as it was the duty of a local authority to rectify wrongs. I think it is his duty to rectify them, or to stop them, when they are causing hardship to poor people, even if they are done with the consent or the connivance of a local authority. The Minister says that as long as a local body does not expend money without sanction he will not interfere, but that he will interfere if there is over-expenditure.

In Dublin, as everyone knows, Miss Harrison does a tremendous amount of work amongst the slum dwellers and amongst the poor people who are in receipt of relief. Miss Harrison is well known for the last 30 years as a lady who has been trying to alleviate distress, and she has brought to the notice of the Minister on several occasions, and also to the present Union Commissioners, certain abuses that are going on. Notwithstanding that fact, the Minister has raised no finger to try to rectify these abuses. He forgets that he is the custodian of the people's welfare. Centralisation of government by the Minister will lead to one thing only. It will lead to rule by the Minister through his Commissioners, and will bring about the results which we have seen, and to which Deputy O'Kelly referred yesterday. Take the situation at Grangegorman. The Commissioners cut down expenses and created certain savings, but when we got back to the governing body of Grangegorman we found that the inmates who worked got the same food as those who did not work, so we gave them something additional for breakfast—porridge, or an egg. Of course the Minister could have created a saving by cutting that item, as it was not there in the Commissioner's time.

It is all very well to make savings, as Deputy Crowley pointed out, during one year, or over a period of years, under a Commissioner, but eventually that is going to re-act on people who will have to take up the burden when the Commissioners are replaced. We can look to Dublin, and recall the Minister's efforts on behalf of the victimised people in the Union scandal, following which there was no public inquiry or no dislocation of the Commissioner system. If any public body had been accused of mismanagement after an audit, to say the least of it, that the Commissioners were accused of in the Dublin Union, the Minister would have dissolved that body and would have had a sworn inquiry. In Dublin the Corporation was abolished and Commissioners put in its place. The city of Dublin is paying to-day for the Minister's move, and will pay for the next twenty years. The debt of the city increased from two and a half millions to almost five millions during the five years' reign of the City Commissioners. Notwithstanding the extra grants given by the Minister in housing subsidies and road grants, the debt of the city almost doubled in the fiye years' period of office of the Commissioners, while the rates increased by at least 3/10 in the £. That is what the people will have to bear now as a result of their administration.

Then we are supposed to reduce the rates immediately we are elected which is an absolute impossibility. I hope the Minister, if he is not going to change his present attitude will, at least, have the courage to say so and state point-blank whether it is the intention of the Government, of which he is a member, to carry on the system of Local Government and Public Health which they are at present giving the country the benefit of. He should say so definitely and give the people an opportunity of judging whether they want a continuation of that or not, when the election comes, as we hope, in the summer or autumn of this year.

Mr. Cassidy

The Minister yesterday in his opening statement came to the House with a flourish of trumpets and gave the Deputies certain statistics in connection with what the Government had done in the building of houses during the past financial year and a number of previous years. When those figures are analysed, as they have been analysed to-day by Deputy Hogan, and compared with what has been done in connection with housing in the Six Counties area or in England or Scotland you find, as far as the Minister's Department is concerned, that they have been going at a snail-like crawl. I believe with the other Deputies who have spoken that this housing problem is a serious one. I believe it can actually be termed a test of statesmanship if not of civilisation. I believe that owing to the fact that we require so many houses, taken in conjunction with the slow rate of building at present, the policy that has been carried on by the Minister's Department for a considerable number of years past has not succeeded in the manner in which we would like to see it succeeding. According to the statistics issued in 1926 we find in Dublin City alone 78,934 people living in one-roomed tenement houses. It is true that some houses have been built in Dublin but there has not been a great enough speeding up with regard to the construction of those houses.

Again, as far as houses that have been built are concerned, if you take the Donnycarney or Cabra or Walsh Road building schemes you find that the people here are asked to pay a sum of 12s. 10d. per week for a four-roomed house and rents ranging from 15s. 10d. up to £1 for a five-roomed house. As long as those conditions prevail in the City of Dublin we are not going to solve the tenement problem.

Deputy Sir James Craig pointed out that some of the unfortunate dwellers in tenement houses are asked to pay for one room 8/- to 12/- a week. When we take into consideration that in Manchester, Birmingham, Liverpool, Derry or Belfast you will get a three or four-roomed house for a similar rent you will see the way people in Dublin are situated so far as houses are concerned. Again, as far as Dublin is concerned, we find a large number of families who went from tenements into those four or five-roomed houses, found after three or four years that they were unable to pay the rent on their wages, with the result that those families were either evicted or had to leave their houses. Deputy Law and Deputy Sir James Craig also referred to the provision of playing fields for children, and Deputy Law dwelt on the difficulty that the Minister would experience in getting those playing fields, as far as Dublin was concerned. Deputies representing Dublin City must be aware that, as far as the Croydon Park and Marino schemes were concerned, two playgrounds were erected, but one of them was closed in as a lawn tennis court, so that the children of the working classes have to play on the streets and run grave risks of meeting with motor accidents. The majority of the people round there think that the Minister should have opened that particular ground as a playground for the children.

The housing problem is not alone confined to the City of Dublin. From the last figures we find that we have 5,538 people living in one-roomed houses in Cork and 4,469 in one-roomed houses in Limerick. I notice that while the Minister gave us figures in regard to the number of houses built for some years past, he did not give us figures dealing with the number of labourers' cottages built in the rural areas. Even in regard to the figures which the Minister gave us, I would very much like if he would give me the number of houses built with motor garages attached, because we find that a big percentage of the houses that have been built have been built for comparatively wealthy people. Even in Dublin City the houses built for the working classes have been built at rents which the workers cannot afford to pay. How can the Minister reconcile rents in Dublin with Derry, Belfast, or even Wexford, where, I understand, similar four-roomed houses are let out at a rent of approximately 5/- or 5/3 per week.

I think it was Deputy Law who said that as far as the Government was concerned they certainly did more during the past five or six years than what the British Government in their time had done for quite a long number of years. I wonder could the same be said as far as rural housing is concerned. Under the Labourers Act approximately 44,000 labourers' cottages have been built in the Free State. We find they are let out at rents ranging from 9d. to 1s. 3d. or 1s. 6d., which the slender purses of the agricultural labourers or road workers are unable to pay. All that sort of thing seems to have practically come to a standstill. Unfortunately, most of the talk was about Dublin or the South of Ireland, but the housing problem is not confined to Dublin or the South of Ireland. In the County Donegal there is a crying demand for labourers' cottages. A number of times I have charged the Government with making one law for the rich and one law for the poor, in other words, passing legislation which is helpful to the rich and detrimental to the poor. If we take the 1925 Act we find that comparatively wealthy persons in Dublin or elsewhere were able to get from the Government a free grant of £100, and sometimes from the local authorities a free grant up to £70. Contrast that with the treatment meted out to agricultural labourers as far as labourers' cottages are concerned. Is the Minister or his Department prepared to give a free grant of £100 to the various boards of health in order that agricultural labourers will be able to get cottages similar to what were built under the Labourers Acts? As I said, that was one law whereby a comparatively wealthy man in Limerick, Dublin, or Wexford could get £100 free to enable him to build a house, whereas the poor agricultural workers, earning 12/- or 14/- a week, would not get equally good treatment. The time has come when the Government will have to change its policy in regard to rural housing. The necessity is there for additional labourers' cottages, and I hope that the Minister, when replying, will outline to us what his Department hopes to do in the future as far as rural housing is concerned. Unfortunately, they have lone very little. Reference has been made by Deputy Crowley, of Kerry, to what the Commissioners in County Kerry did. The Minister's Department have abolished the Bundoran Urban District Council and the Ballyshannon Town Commissioners and put in a Commissioner. I would like to know what the Commissioner has done in Ballyshannon or Bundoran in the way of providing much needed houses for the working-classes. The time is opportune for a big housing problem, not alone in the cities but in the rural areas, where there is urgent need for additional cottages, which can be let to agricultural workers at rents which they afford to pay.

Dr. Ward

I listened with considerable interest to the speech made by Deputy Sir James Craig. When he had concluded, I wondered how he justified his introductory remarks. He began by expressing himself as being almost entirely satisfied with the progress that the public health question was making under the present administration, and explained how he had gradually found himself converted from the belief that the present Minister for Local Government is unfit to solve this question till he became almost an enthusiast. As Deputy Sir James Craig warmed up to his subject he advanced very considerably. We found before he had concluded—presumably he forgot his original intention not to be too critical—that he severely criticised practically every branch of Local Government and Public Health administration. When we come to examine the case upon which he claimed that public health matters are advancing in the twenty-six county area, we find that very little evidence has been put before us to justify that assertion.

It has been stated that there has been a slight decrease in the death-rate from scarlet fever and typhoid. It would be much more interesting to us to know whether there has been a decrease—there may be, but I am not aware of the figures—in the number of cases of typhoid and scarlet fever. The number of deaths is not a true reflex of the progress that may have been made by the Public Health Department in eradicating these diseases. It is quite possible that a reduction in the death-rate might be due to the more scientific treatment. These are the only two diseases, apparently, that can be paraded before the Dáil as having decreased. We find that the death-rate from diphtheria has considerably decreased, but that infant mortality has increased slightly, and that while the mortality for tuberculosis is somewhat lower, the number of cases treated during the year has increased by 16 per cent. If the number of cases of tuberculosis of various forms treated has increased by 16 per cent., we must come to the conclusion that tuberculosis was more prevalent in the year under discussion than it was in the previous year.

We find the Vote increased by a sum of £32,781, the amount demanded this year being £517,517. I do not suggest that there ought not to be increases under certain sub-heads, but if there are to be increases I think we ought to ensure that these increases are calculated to secure for us a better return. We find that there is a sum of £17,500 included in the Vote for the medical treatment of school children, an increase of £7,300. I do not think that the question of the medical treatment of school children, so far as the treatment end of it is concerned, has been properly worked out.

We have been told that so far as medical inspection has gone it discloses that 60 per cent. of school children examined require treatment. Some of these children could be treated under the Medical Charities Acts. Provision could be made for their treatment even if that treatment involves specialised treatment in one of the city hospitals, but the class of people that adequate provision is not being made for are the children of parents who cannot afford to pay in a city hospital for the treatment of their children and yet are not entitled to treatment under the Medical Charities Act. A very big percentage of the children who would require treatment under the present scheme belong to that class, and I think that the Minister ought to make some arrangement that would ensure that such children would get the best skilled treatment that can be provided for them in this country, and that they would not have to pay more for it than would be, after inquiry, considered to be a reasonable amount. It is quite true that the Department places a certain amount of money at the disposal of local authorities for the treatment of school children provided they put up a similar amount. But the tendency is, because of the magnitude of this problem of treatment, to turn all these cases in for treatment to the county hospital. Leaving aside the dental treatment which is a class of treatment in itself, most of the other surgical treatment that is required is of a highly specialised nature, the treatment of the eye, ear, nose, and so on. No matter how skilled a general surgeon may be in a county hospital—and I do not want anybody to think that speaking on this subject I am criticising the skill of any of these men, because as general surgeons they are very competent men—it is altogether absurd to expect him to give highly specialised treatment for the special organs, the eye, ear, throat and nose. Even in Dublin a first-class surgeon, an abdominal or a bone surgeon, will not undertake surgery of the ear, eye or throat; and what the first-class surgeons in the cities will not undertake to do should not be imposed on the surgeon in the county hospital. The reason these cases are being turned on to the surgeon in the county hospital is because of the problem of treatment. The problem I suggest has not been properly worked out; a proper scheme of treatment has not been devised. The county surgeon has to be county physician as well. He has to treat any medical cases that come into the county hospital. He has to do maternity work and he is supposed to be expert in all these various departments. He would require to be a super-surgeon, and even a super-surgeon I think could not be a specialist in all the branches that a surgeon in the county hospital is expected to be expert in.

The result of that particular position is that the children of the poorer classes who are not entitled to treatment under the Medical Charities Acts are being deprived of the treatment which the medical inspection of school children discloses that they require. Coming to the question of the treatment of tuberculosis, we find that there is an increase under that heading of £17,500, the total amount this year being £109,250. I submit that there is not an intelligent conception of that problem of tuberculosis in the Public Health Department at present, or if that intelligent conception does exist, for some reason or other effect has not been given to it. It is generally agreed, as Deputy Sir James Craig pointed out, that surgical tuberculosis is in the main conveyed by tubercle infected milk. It seems to me to be nothing short of foolish at any rate to be providing huge sums of money year after year for the treatment of surgical tuberculosis, while steps are not being taken to ensure that tubercle infected milk will not be sold for human consumption. I cannot understand how any public Department that takes itself seriously could continue to ask for huge sums of money year after year without taking the obvious step, in that particular case at any rate, of removing the cause of the disease. £109,250 for the treatment of tuberculosis, £8,500 for meals for school children, and considerable sums in addition are estimated for under that particular heading. The £109,000 represents only about 50 per cent. of the total expenditure, inasmuch as public bodies put up an equal amount. Yet, we are working in a vicious circle until we tackle the question of removing the cause, which in that case is so obvious. Until we do that we are merely wasting our efforts.

Dealing with the question of tuberculosis and the expenditure we are called upon to sanction, there are some other aspects to which I would like to refer. I drew attention to them before, but I presume I shall have to continue drawing attention to these matters in the hope that some time or other effect will perhaps be given to some of the suggestions that we make. Previously I drew attention to the effect that the denuding of this country of trees has had on climatic conditions. I do not think anybody in the Public Health Department will contradict me when I say that this is a very large contributing cause of tuberculosis here, and that an elaborate scheme of afforestation, apart from any other reason why that scheme should be embarked upon, because of the improved climatic conditions that would follow such a scheme, is an absolute necessity if tuberculosis is to be eradicated.

I agree with those Deputies who have declared that the Minister's housing policy is not seriously contributing towards the solution of the tuberculosis problem. There is no doubt that we are getting houses built, and that is all to the good, but if we are not getting a house closed that is unfit for human habitation for every house that is built we are not making real headway. In that matter I am entirely in agreement with Deputy Hogan. From my experience, both in urban and rural areas, I can say that what is really happening is that houses are being built and subsidies availed of. The rent of the houses, however, is so high that the poor people who occupy houses considered to be unfit for human habitation are unable to pay the rent of the new houses. Something could be done towards the solution of that problem, because when these new houses come to be occupied, second and third class houses fit for human habitation, at any rate, become vacant. I think that the Department of Public Health should insist whenever new houses are occupied that people who are living in houses unfit for human occupation should get the preference for the houses that become vacant and which they can occupy because of the economic rents on them. Such a scheme could be evolved in the urban areas if the Minister set his mind to it, and if he fully realised the seriousness of the housing problem in relation to tuberculosis.

In the rural areas matters are worse to this extent, that practically all the houses that are being built in these areas are being built not by public bodies, but by private individuals, and the private individual who is able to build a house with the aid of a subsidy of £45 is, in nine cases out of ten, a man who is reasonably housed at present. In the rural areas we are getting no further with the solution of the housing problem from the public health point of view, because the houses that are unfit for habitation, and which should be closed if we had any place to put the people that occupy them, continue to be occupied, and will continue to be occupied, unless the housing policy of the Local Government Department is radically altered. A small farmer of £10 valuation or under cannot build a house with the aid of a £45 subsidy. There is no use talking about credit—that the public bodies can arrange a loan for him. A loan is no use to a man who cannot make ends meet, and will not be availed of. Building a house is not an economic proposition for the class of people I mention, and the only solution of that particular problem is to make a subsidy large enough to cover the cost of building materials and to pay the tradesmen. I submit that that particular class of persons, namely, the small farmers who have no credit and who could not avail of credit, if they got it, because they would not be in a position to pay it back, are not being properly treated in this matter of housing, because they are contributing their share of the money which goes to subsidise the building of houses for people much better off, and are not going to get any return.

Deputy Sir James Craig was very enthusiastic about the appointment of county medical officers of health and the progress that was being made in the Public Health Department in that connection. The appointment of county medical officers of health may be all right, but I am in thorough agreement with the Deputy who said in this debate that if the Public Health Department could not, and would not, give effect to the obvious recommendations of the dispensary doctors and medical officers of health that were in existence before the county medical officers of health came to be appointed, then it is no use to have county medical officers of health merely to state that what these dispensary doctors have been reporting for the past twenty years is true. In my own district I found, on looking over the blocks of the previous medical officer's report book, that houses condemned as far back as twenty years ago as being unfit for human habitation are still occupied. We are not going to get any further by appointing county medical officers of health who will say merely that what Doctor So-and-So reported twenty years ago was true, and that what Dr. Ward reports is true to-day. The Department of Public Health know what is wrong; it is brought under their notice by the existing machinery, and if the whole purpose of the appointment of county medical officers of health is to emphasise the conditions existing it gets us no further. What we want is to remove some of the obvious causes of ill-health and disease persistently pointed out for years, and not to set up new machinery for the purpose of emphasising what is already well-known.

While I say all that I do not say that these men should not be appointed. I say it would be quite a sound thing to do if there was a disposition in the Department of Public Health to give effect to their recommendations, and the necessity for them would not exist at all if the recommendation of the medical officers of health who preceded them were carried out.

Under the head of Venereal Disease a sum of £7,300 is provided. I drew attention to this matter before but I do not think it had any effect. The Minister may consider this a foolish recommendation; perhaps officials of his Department may advise him so. But I still persist that for this £7,300 plus a similar amount raised by the local bodies there is no adequate return. Schemes are in existence in many counties, probably in all counties, for the treatment of this disease, but people suffering from this disease are not availing of these schemes. They are not going to the doctor who is appointed and who everyone knows is appointed for the treatment of this disease. I say you could get far better return for far less expenditure if these people were treated in one institution. I repeat again what I said under this head some year or two ago: That these people should be isolated until they are certified as cured. I ask the Minister to take a sensible view of that particular representation. I think it is just as necessary that these people should be isolated and the public protected from the possibility of contamination as the people suffering from other infectious diseases contracted perhaps in a more innocent way.

On the general question of the administration of the Department of Local Government and Public Health I would like again to draw the attention of the House to the fact that the increased expenditure we are having this year is likely to give a very bad return; and that there need be no increase of expenditure if the necessary economies were carried out in branches of the Department that could afford it. We have in the Local Government Department more sub-departments than I could count and each of these seems to be a self-contained unit. I cannot for the life of me see why, when the Minister sends down a housing inspector to a particular county why that housing inspector would not deal with housing, with drainage, with roads and all matters appertaining to engineering while in an area instead of confining him to a particular sub-division of the work that he is sent down to inspect.

The same applies perhaps to a greater extent to the medical inspection. It is very hard to see why it would be impossible for a medical inspector when sent to an area to deal with applicants say for blind pensions, and also the inspection of the dispensaries, sanatoria, general sanitation and various other matters such as applications for National Health Insurance benefit, etc. I cannot see how all these matters could not be cleared up on one visit by one inspector instead of having a troop of inspectors. Very often there is such a clash of forces in areas that one group of inspectors has to be held up by the Department until the group on the spot vacates. I think that system is indefensible under the existing economic conditions in this country. I do not think we have much to hope for from the present Ministry. We have drawn attention to these things for many years, still they seem to jog along in the same old way. All we can do is to continue to draw attention to these matters and eventually if we cannot get any change in the administration of the public health system or in the personnel of the Executive Council a change will have to be brought about in another way.

Mr. Doherty

For the last few hours speeches have been made on this Estimate. I was agreeably surprised by the speech of the last speaker. It did not contain any of the venom and viciousness that he usually applies in this House when addressing the Minister for Local Government and Public Health. He has made some suggestions as a medical man. I shall not enter into them because he is speaking from experience, and it is a matter for the Department; but I would refer to some of the earlier speeches which contained no concrete practical suggestions, such as those contained in the speech of the Deputy. Deputy Hogan, on the Labour benches, made a speech which would perhaps have been beautiful before a statistical society, but all I could find in it, outside the statistics, was a suggestion that the Minister should go down to Kilrush or Ennis, and notwithstanding the fact that he put up houses there, should remove people from the congested houses, and put them into new ones. The Deputy quoted a lot of statistics. I could not help thinking that, in the absence of the Deputy Chairman of the main Opposition Party, whom I am glad to see back in his place, Deputy Hogan had stolen his clothes and all contained in them, and came to the House with that clothing turned inside out as a protest against the action of the Minister. In his unregenerate days in 1924, 1925 and 1926 that Deputy was a very strong supporter of the Government. He delivered some famous dictums here which I would rather have expected to come from Deputy Flinn.

Mr. Flinn

I would have said dicta.

Mr. Doherty

I forget what the discussion was but I know that it was one such as this into which statistics entered very largely and the Deputy, controverting these statistics, said that it was well known that statistics were based on figures, lies, and damned lies. The Deputy's speech contained a mass of undigested figures at which he is only an amateur and if he had only invoked the assistance of my friends opposite he would have done better. I want to give my own experience in regard to housing schemes. In Donegal they have taken great advantage of these schemes, not only in the towns but also in the rural areas. I did not understand from Deputy Dr. Ward's speech that he was referring to insanitary houses in rural areas in his constituency but I know that in Donegal, both in towns and rural districts, we have transformed areas which formerly looked insanitary and now look charming. One of these Housing Acts is still in force and houses are being built under it. That Act is supplemented by another, the Housing (Gaeltacht) Act, from which we expect big things. Levelling a charge against the Minister's Department of neglect in the matter of housing is not genuine or honest, and it is not fair that such statements should go out, even though they are reported only in the "Kilrush Eagle" or the "Monaghan Blazer." As to the Vote generally, I may say that I have some experience of departments and of administration and I can honestly state that there is no department in the country that is so well administered as that of Local Government and Public Health.

Mr. Flinn

That is a horrible libel on the other departments.

Mr. Doherty

Deputy Lemass invites me to speak. When he was down in Kerry recently did he raise the question of housing or the question of local administration? No; he goes in for high politics when he goes there. He has not yet spoken on this Vote and I do not think that he will. I do not wish to delay the House any further, though the subject is one about which I could speak with some knowledge. All I desire now to say is that if any Vote deserves to pass without undue hostile criticism it is the Vote of the Minister for Local Government and Public Health.

Mr. Corry

It is rather significant that on this, the last opportunity which this House will have of dealing with the Minister in his capacity as head of the Local Government Department, because he will probably be one of those who will be eliminated in the June election, there should be so many criticisms of his Department. Deputy Doherty told us that he could not help thinking of certain things about this Department. I am glad to see that some Cumann na nGaedheal Deputy is thinking, because I was under the impression that Deputies of that party had given up that function long ago.

Mr. Flinn

They try not to.

Mr. Corry

I would like to go into a few matters in connection with this Department, a Department which I consider is the worst of a number of bad departments. I will first take the position as regards the promotion of officials. I believe that the Minister's action in that matter is entirely illegal and is absolutely contrary to the Act which he himself brought in here and which was passed through the House. We had recently a vacancy in the Cork Lunatic Asylum. I wish we had more vacancies there, because I know a large number of Deputies opposite who will have nowhere else to go in a short time. The Asylum Committee promoted the Assistant Medical Superintendent to the position of Chief Superintendent, but the Minister refused to allow that promotion to be carried out, and said that it should be done through the Appointments Commissioners, despite the fact that it was pointed out that it would mean a considerable saving to the ratepayers, and, in the opinion of the Committee, greater efficiency in the work of the asylum. The chairman of that Committee is a man with very considerable experience of local bodies and of administration generally. The Executive Council, in fact, thought so much of his experience that they placed him on the De-rating Committee, yet the Minister turned down that proposal and tried to inflict on the ratepayers a further burden, though the promotion in question would have meant a saving of about £2,000 a year.

Next we have the policy generally of the Minister with regard to officials. Some time ago a sworn inquiry was held into the salaries of officials in the case of the South Cork Board. The inspector who held the inquiry recommended in one particular case an inclusive salary of £750 a year. Another paid official of the Minister, the City Commissioner in Cork, recommended an increase of that salary to £950, and the Minister very kindly granted it. That is the position of affairs. We find that a salary of £750 a year was not sufficient for the Secretary of the Board of Health, though the Minister's own inspector fixed that salary at an inquiry. The salary was increased on the recommendation of the Commissioner to £950. I suppose that was part of the policy of sending down officials to rule officials. It is apparently one of the set policies of the Minister's Department.

Again, we had recently in Cork the question of the supervision of roads. We had, apparently, as a result of a conference held here in Dublin by a number of officials, a set proposal sent down for a salary of £1,500 a year for the county surveyor, with three assistants at £550 each. That proposal was turned down by the county council. The recommendation which the county council sent up to the Minister was turned down, and it took over three months in sending proposals up and down before the Minister at last gave way on this matter. The result was that the county surveyor who, the Minister thought, was entitled to £1,500, was very glad to work for £1,000 a year. In regard to the three assistants who were to get £550 each the Minister afterwards agreed that two assistants would be able to do the work at £450 each, representing a saving of £1,250 a year in one Department alone. The set policy of the Minister's Department in that matter is, I might say, to increase the salaries of surveyors by at least 100 per cent. in the last four years, not to go beyond that. We found that in 1927 we were able to get two assistant surveyors at £250 each. These assistant surveyors were sanctioned by the Minister at that salary, and apparently they would not have been sanctioned by the Minister if he had not considered them well able to do the work. As a matter of fact, they were so capable of doing the work that the Minister was able afterwards to sanction them as county surveyors when they were selected by the Appointments Commissioners.

This constant sending down of letters from the Minister stating, "I do not think this salary sufficient for such a large position as county surveyor," or "I do not think this salary sufficient for such a position," has forced all salaries in that Department up by 100 per cent., seeing that at present we have to give £450 as salary for a position for which we got a man in 1927 for £250. We have that line running right through in the case of the higher paid officials. We have another line running through in the case of the lower paid officials. We have had letters sent down by the Minister in which he solemnly stated that the maximum wage to be paid to road workers, working on grant work, was £1 9s. per week. A man has to support himself, his wife and children on that wage, and that is even on part-time work. Such a man might get two months' work in the twelve months at £1 9s. per week. I wonder what kind of living the man is entitled to for whom he recommends a salary of £1,500 a year. We have a direct increase recommended by the Minister in the case of the higher paid officials and a steady grinding down of the wages of the ordinary worker. That is the definite policy laid down in the Minister's Department. It is a policy of which I do not think this House would approve. Then we had the abolition of the Insurance Committees and the placing of those insured over on the Boards of Assistance. Those people were paying insurance for a long period.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That has been done by legislation I think, and the Deputy cannot go into it.

Mr. Corry

I am dealing with the amount of money granted by the Minister.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is that fixed by statute?

General Mulcahy

Yes.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy cannot go into that.

Mr. Corry

We had a gentleman sent down from the Minister's Department to the Cork County Council and the Tuberculosis Committee to work up the tuberculosis scheme. That was a gentleman named Dr. Boyd-Barrett. He made an agreement with the County Council which the Minister completely ignored and refused to honour afterwards. He did not refuse to honour it until the County Council had become involved in the scheme in such a manner that they could not go back on it. Domiciliary treatment has been abolished, and despite repeated demands and requests from the Tuberculosis Committee, for the provision of nourishment, the Minister and his Department steadily refuse to sanction the giving of any nourishment whatever under the tuberculosis scheme. We know very well of rural conditions, and we know that if you want to stop tuberculosis you must in the early stages give decent nourishment to the patient. A bottle of cod liver oil is of very little use to a patient who has not got proper nourishment in the early stages. Though Dr. Boyd-Barrett gave definite guarantees in that respect, the Minister went back on these guarantees and ignored them afterwards. There is very little use in trying to stop tuberculosis in the earlier stages if the people to whom you give medicine get practically no nourishment. The provision of adequate nourishment would not be sanctioned or allowed by the Minister for Local Government.

I am glad to say that during the last twelve months there has been a slight improvement in the trades department of the Minister. I am glad that as a result of the lesson we taught him he made some inquiries into the working of the Department and has speeded up things a little. It only takes three months now to get back a sample whereas it took nine months last year. There is a decided improvement and I congratulate the Minister on that improvement. The stuff is not all used now before we get back a sample. The settled policy of the Ministry with regard to roads is a policy which is not for the good of the ratepayers. The policy of sending down an order that a refund will only be given for certain trunk roads but that no refund will be given for link or ordinary roads used by the farming community is a bad one. The result is that much of the ratepayers' money has been spent on the improvement of the steam-rolled roads for motorists for a number of years past in the County Cork. That money could be much more advantageously spent on the ordinary and county roads that are now neglected.

After all, the ratepayers can only bear a certain burden. I can call the policy of the Minister's Department nothing else but a policy of unblushing bribery when the Department says to the local authority "for every pound that you spend on trunk roads you will get 40 per cent. back." An inducement of that description held out to the county council generally results in an uneven division of the money. Too much is allowed to steam-rolled roads and too little for the ordinary county roads. It is all very well for the Minister and for the officials of the Minister who want to be able to drive over steam-rolled roads, but these roads, one must remember, are almost impossible roads for the farmers' horses. If the Minister's officials want those roads for their own convenience they should be prepared to pay for them and not throw the burden on the unfortunate farming community. That is one of the matters into which the Minister should have looked.

Since this will be the Minister's last appearance in this role, I would ask him now at least to strive to undo some of the bad work he has done. I put it to him that he should now as a last act of grace before he departs, write a letter to the local bodies giving them permission to pay a decent and fair working wage to the labourers in their employment. I ask him to remove that special restriction against paying more than the maximum wage of 29s. per week to the road workers. That wage is a disgraceful one. I do not think that a single member of the Minister's own Party except the Minister himself would stand over a 29s. wage as a maximum wage.

General Mulcahy

Where is that?

Mr. Corry

In a letter sent down by the Minister in connection with grants for roads.

General Mulcahy

When?

Mr. Corry

Four years ago. That letter or order has controlled every grant made since.

General Mulcahy

That is why the Cork County Council are paying 35/- a week.

Mr. Corry

I am not allading to the ordinary maintenance work on the roads. I am alluding to the road work for which grants are paid. I am glad the Minister reminded me of that, because his Department's officials made a very good attempt to get that 35/- reduced on one occasion when they came down for a conference with the finance committee of the county council. On that occasion they made a very bold attempt. I saw one of the highly-paid officials of the Minister's Department holding up his hands in horror when he found that the Cork County Council dared to pay 35/- a week, "when," he said, "you can get plenty of men for 29/- a week." I am very glad indeed that the Minister reminded me of the manner in which his official, who was drawing £1,200 to £1,500 a year, turned round to tell the under-dog that he is not to get more than 29/- a week in order to keep up existence. I ask the Minister as a last act of grace, seeing that perhaps he might be on the unemployed list himself later on, to increase the wage of the unfortunate working man beyond 29/- a week. I think that restriction on the wages of the workers was one of the worst acts of the Minister's career. His action in forcing down the wages of the unfortunate workers in this country was one with which very few would agree.

Mr. Anthony

So much has been said as to the lack of proper housing in this country that I am not going to take up the time of the House in making very many comments on the Government's housing policy. It is well known what the policy of the Labour Party has been on that very important subject. We have suggested that there should be a national housing authority as against the little parochial way in which the Minister's Department deals with this most important question. It need not occasion any surprise, therefore, to learn from what has been said in the House here to-day and yesterday that dissatisfaction has been expressed all over the country with the policy of the Minister's Department in the matter of housing. I will not, therefore, say very much on that phase of the subject of local government.

I am anxious to know what authority have borough councils and corporations to refuse the remission of rates in cases where the Government have given housing grants? The reason I ask that question is because of the fact that during the last couple of years two important housing schemes were undertaken in Cork City. In the first scheme of housing it appears that the tenants who purchased were given remission of rates. The second set of persons who purchased their holdings or who entered into a purchase scheme by way of deposit and the rest on weekly or monthly instalments found, after some time had elapsed, that they had to bear the burden of the rates. I want the Minister to tell us what is the cause of the discrimination? Both schemes were undertaken by the Cork Corporation acting through the City Manager. Why has discrimination been made between the two sets of persons? Why should one set of tenants pay the rates and the other set have remission of rates?

During the course of the debate I have heard, particularly from Deputy Ward, some comments on the medical services. It is a pleasant feature and one that I welcome to find that under those school medical services there is an increase of £7,300. That is in one sense a very useful form of expenditure and I say in one sense very advisable. But I am not at all in agreement with Deputy Ward or with any other medical man in this country when they tell us that one of the causes which would contribute very largely to a reduction in tubercular diseases in this country would be reafforestation, more trees, and that sort of stuff—I cannot call it anything else. It is all very well to find employment for a few extra and superfluous doctors. That is very good. In my view, and I dare say in the view of any person who has given thought to the matter of medical inspection of school children, there is no use in that inspection so long as we have bad housing conditions, insanitary, unhygienic homes, tenements, unemployment and underfeeding. Any layman can understand that and one need not take out a first year's medical course to understand that without nourishment all your cod liver oil, your new laid eggs and chickens are of very little use. Without the money to procure these commodities I say that prescriptions are of very little use.

I would like to refer to the conditions under which many of the nurses in the various poor law institutions under the aegis of the Department have to work. They are obliged to work inordinately long hours. Into the care of those ladies, who have had to undergo a long and arduous training, are committed the sick men, women and children who cannot afford to go into hospitals or nursing homes. These ladies, after a considerable period of training, find themselves in the position that they have to work from 12 to 14 hours a day in many cases. I have here a return showing the hours of duty and the wages paid to these nurses and I must say it is a disgrace to the Department.

[An Ceann Comhairle took the Chair.]

In one of these county hospitals a nurse was on duty from 8 o'clock in the morning until 9 o'clock at night. She got two hours off during that period. That means that a nurse does duty 11 hours each day. The night nurse comes on duty at 9 p.m. and finishes at 8 a.m. next day. I could mention several of the county homes and hospitals in which these nurses have to work extraordinarily long hours. In one district hospital where the average number of patients was 50 there were four day nurses and two night nurses. There are no half-days or whole days off, but they get twenty-eight days annual leave. They are obliged to work 70 hours per week. It has been stated here, often enough, that the State should be a model employer, but I am afraid it is a rather peculiar model to hold up, to suggest a duty of 70 hours a week for a nurse, whose duty is strenuous, even if she had to work the ordinary eight-hour day. To compel them to work 70 hours a week is, to my mind, and I am sure it is to the minds of other Deputies, a blot on our system of local government.

I would like to discuss the whole question of housing but it has been discussed already by many Deputies. I suggest to the Minister that in so far as the various schemes relating to Cork City are concerned we find that not even a fringe of the problem there has been touched. We were told a number of houses would be erected for the working class people. In all cases up to the present where houses have been erected the speculative builders have certainly got away with the spoils. There are no houses erected for which the ordinary working class man can afford to pay. Through the building grants made by the Department houses have been built in Cork by a builder who must, apparently, find a good deal of favour with the Department. Those houses have been let at 25/- a week. Surely the Minister does not suggest that the ordinary working class man or woman can afford to pay that much per week for a house?

I would like to know from the Minister why it was in a recent contract for houses in Cork City, where a building corporation known as the British Housing Corporation put in the lowest tender, that tender was not accepted. They were not given the contract. The scheme was re-advertised, another style of house was suggested, and in the end the contract was given to a local man, a Cork contractor. Those houses could easily have been begun long ago. It was only recently they were commenced. Why is the subsidy given to builders of that character in Dublin, Cork, or elsewhere? I suggest it was never in the minds of Deputies here that this money, given by way of subsidy, should go to build up fortunes for speculative builders and corporations. In many cases where men were able to build their own houses, and where they were in a position to take advantage of the grant, houses were built. It was a very useful and praiseworthy thing for the Government to institute such a system.

I speak from inside knowledge, however, when I say that this grant has been taken advantage of very largely by speculative builders. They have got the advantages of the grant, and I believe it was the intention of every Deputy here that the benefit of the grant was to be given to the incoming tenant or the purchaser, and not to the builder. It might be argued that were it not for that inducement no houses would be erected. Is it not strange that there was not some clause put into the Bill whereby there would be some method of valuing the amount of work the builder would do, and suggesting to the builder that if he did not let the house at a reasonable rent, or sell at a reasonable figure, he would not get the subsidy? Everything appears to have been done for the rich man as against the poor man, who is unable to put down the full purchase price, or even portion of it, and thus secure the advantage of the grant.

I would like to mention a recent contract in Cork, and I would like to question why certain builders have got huge grants by way of subsidy from the Government, and they have not given any undertaking to the Government that they would let the houses at a fair rent. I would like to know why it is that these builders are still able to get Government contracts, and why the Housing Corporation, which proposed to build the houses thousands of pounds cheaper, did not get the contract. I can quite understand the type of answer I will get; I can even anticipate it. I know, however, that that will not satisfy the Cork people, nor will it satisfy me. I know the kind of case that will be made. I know the Minister will try to shield himself behind the statement that this is a privileged case, and he does not want to mention certain circumstances which might possibly injure the contractor or other persons concerned.

I do suggest, though I am anticipating, that that is not a proper or a right answer for the Minister, and he knows it. I hope that the present contract that has been entered into between the Corporation of the City of Cork through the City Manager and the building contractor to whom I have referred will be carried out to the satisfaction of an engineer in the Department of Local Government. I want to have that clear and explicit. As far as I can I will see to it that the Department of Local Government will do its duty in this connection. If they do not send one of their principal engineers to ensure that a proper return is given for the money spent, then we will get some one in Cork to do it, and we will see to it that he will get paid. I suggest that the Minister should take these things into consideration and avoid a scandal.

Mr. Corkery

A good deal has been said from all sides of the House on the housing question. As regards delays on the part of the Local Government Department, I have some experience as far as my own constituency is concerned. It was proposed some time ago to build twenty houses in Macroom. The building plans were sanctioned by the Minister at first, but there has since been a delay, with the result that, at present at all events, it is quite possible the houses may not be built at all. Macroom urban district is one of the highest rated in Cork County. There is available a fairly large sum of money, the proceeds from the sale of houses built years ago. The council think that they are entitled to use this money for the building of houses instead of being obliged to raise a loan for the purpose, a loan that would throw a heavy charge on the rates. The Minister states that he has no power to allow them to use the money in that way. The Minister had not power to do a good many other things that were not so urgent as the building of houses in Macroom, and when he found he had not the power he took steps to get it. I suggest that he should do the same in this case and allow the Macroom Urban Council to use this money, which has been lying idle for a fairly long time, for the purpose of building houses which are badly needed. A large number of houses in the town have been condemned for a number of years. I cannot recall the exact number, but the Minister has the information in his Department.

In carrying out some other schemes the council some time ago made an agreement with the local bank for a loan which was to be repaid over a period of fifteen years. The Minister refused to sanction a longer period than ten years. The council and the bank were agreeable to have the loan repaid in fifteen years. It is not necessary to emphasise that it would be much easier for the ratepayers to pay off the loan in fifteen than in ten years. The Minister, however, refused his sanction, and gave no reason for doing so. Sanitation in most of the villages and in some of the towns in my part of the country is in a deplorable state. I mentioned the matter here before but very little has since been done to remedy the situation. The county council are unable to raise enough money to carry out the improvements necessary. They could not think of putting an extra tax on the people who are already overburdened with taxation. As far as our experience goes, the only time the Department of Local Government is in a hurry is when they want to grant increases to some of the higher-paid officials. When such increases are granted sanction for them is given quickly, but if it is a question of carrying out some useful work, public bodies have to wait for months before sanction is received. Sometimes they have to write half a dozen times to the Department to get sanction.

There are a great many labourers' plots in parts of the country but no attempt is being made to build cottages on them. Houses are badly needed. The plots are there for a number of years. One or two of the owners of these plots approached me recently and stated that they would be prepared to erect huts on them if permission could be obtained. They cannot get permission from the county council or from anybody else. These people are labourers and cannot afford to build houses on the plots.

The state of the by-roads in my constituency is very bad. The Department of Local Government seem to be interested solely in the main roads—making billiard tables of them. The by-roads are neglected and are in a scandalous state. The people who pay the rates use these roads more than the others and the Department should see that attention is paid to them.

Dr. Tubridy

A lot has been said in this House and down the country in their public speeches by Ministers about civic responsibility. I notice that the Minister for Local Government, in introducing this Estimate, could not forego the opportunity of mentioning this term. I hold that whatever sense of civic responsibility exists in the country, or did exist, has been very badly shaken by the attitude taken up by the Minister in the way he deals with public representatives who freely and voluntarily, without pay, attend meetings of county councils, boards of health, dispensary committees and other subcommittees appointed by county councils. They do their work well, without very much thanks and at a great loss to themselves. The Minister talks about inculcating a spirit of civic responsibility. I think it is rather hard now that people who voluntarily took upon themselves the duties of county councillors, membership of boards of health and other public bodies should be treated in the manner that they have been by the Minister himself. In this connection I thought for some time that the Minister for Local Government simply abolished county councils in a haphazard sort of way. Practically every week or fortnight one would see that such and such a county council was abolished, or that such a board of health was abolished, and it was very hard to understand why the Minister took such drastic steps with these bodies without any reason being evident.

I want to deal with the one elected body that I know in my constituency that was abolished. To say that it was abolished because it was incompetent would not be true and the Minister knows that quite well. It is not because it is in my constituency I say that, but because I think it is generally accepted in Connacht, and in other counties that, knowing the conditions that exist in Galway, the board of health there was the best board of health in the twenty-six counties. In order to prove that I need only mention that the Galway Board of Health carried out all the schemes of centralisation as regards hospital and other services that they were asked to carry out by the Minister. They erected a hospital at a very big cost. They put in new lighting, a water supply, a new sewerage scheme, and reconverted the old buildings. I cannot say what it cost but I know that they have a hospital in Galway that could not be equalled in the City of Dublin. Not content with that, they erected a pathological laboratory. I have some experience of pathological laboratories in the city of Dublin, and I can safely say that the one attached to Galway central hospital could not be equalled by any of the Dublin hospitals. They appointed a staff including a resident medical officer and paid him a whole time salary. They appointed three surgeons whose qualifications could not be beaten in this country and they paid them. They appointed a gynaecologist, and they also erected a maternity hospital and a fever hospital in connection with the central hospital. They paid a pathologist and two resident surgeons. They went to this enormous expense and they put the medical services in Galway in such a condition that they were a pride to the people of the county.

When visitor came to this country and asked the Minister to be shown some of the hospitals erected under his regime, he sent them down to Galway and pointed to it as an example of what he intended to do in other parts of the country. The same could not be said for any other county in the West. The expense was undertaken freely and voluntarily by the Galway Board of Health. They put the medical services into such a condition that I do not think very much more capital expenditure will have to be incurred in Galway for a long time. When this work was done, and when the hospital services were running smoothly, the Minister turns round and suddenly abolishes the board of health over what I call a very trivial matter. It arose owing to the fact that they refused to appoint an assistant medical officer. It appears very strange to me that in other counties where no county medical officer of health was appointed such steps were not taken as were taken against Galway Board of Health, where a county medical officer of health was appointed. Because they did not appoint an assistant medical officer immediately, they were abolished. As was said to-day by a Deputy from Kerry, the matter looked very like as if it was a political business. That is the considered opinion of people in the country. The majority of the members of the board of health in Galway are Republicans. No other reason can be given for its abolition.

It may be said that they should have appointed an assistant medical officer. If the Minister were here I would like to ask him to explain what were the duties of the assistant medical officer to be. We all know that an assistant medical officer will be required to the county medical officer of health, but surely it would be time enough to make that appointment when the board of health saw how the scheme would work out. However, the Minister insisted on rushing the appointment. I have nothing whatever to say against the appointment of an assistant to the county medical officer of health, but I say to the Minister that if he thought as much of civic responsibility as he said he did he should either have gone down or written down to the board of health and told them what his scheme was as regards public health for the county. He did not do so. After all the expense that the board of health incurred on the erection of a hospital and in the appointment of a county medical officer of health, at least the Minister should not have dealt with them in such a drastic way without explaining the necessity for this assistant medical officer of health. He did not do so. The board of health having appointed a county medical officer of health and seeing the expense that was going to fall on them following the appointing of whole-time nurses, a clerk to the county medical officer of health, and other officers, feared that they would be told that one assistant would not be sufficient, but that probably five or six would be required. When they saw that what was outlined by the medical inspectors would entail the expenditure of thousands of pounds in the hospital they naturally wanted to see how the scheme would work out before making any new appointments. The Minister did not give them any opportunity of doing that.

I think the Minister is rushing this scheme too quickly. I should not say that he is rushing this scheme, because the Minister has no scheme. The Minister simply looks over to England and says: "There is a county medical officer of health there. Let us have the same." He has no arrangement for co-ordinating the medical and health services in this country. He thinks when he appoints a county medical officer of health and an assistant that the work is done. Nothing more foolish could be imagined. That is only the beginning of the public health service, the very minimum, and the Minister knows that. But the board of health would want to be told these things. The matter should be faced squarely, and the board of health should be told the amount of expenditure that they would be liable for, and that this is only the beginning of a very big scheme to improve the public health services. They were not told that. They thought their duty was done when they appointed a county medical officer of health. I think the treatment of this board of health by the Minister was scandalous, and if he thinks that is the best method of developing a sense of civic responsibility I am very much afraid he is mistaken.

There are great difficulties in England at present over these public health services, because they have the panel system, the parish doctor, the certifying surgeon in the factory, and five or six other types of doctors, all dealing with the same type of patient at different times. The position in England is that they are trying to get the services co-ordinated. They are trying to utilise the parish doctor and the other men already employed to build up a service. They find they have gone too far with their scheme, with the result that there is no co-ordination in the public health services at all.

The Minister for Local Government is apparently trying the same system here. He is going to make all those appointments, and there is no scheme on which they would work. I do not believe that the county councils know yet what the duties of a county medical officer of health are, much less do they know what the duties of his assistant should be. When the Galway Board of Health asked that the duties of the assistant should be defined, they were asking what, to my mind, they should have asked, and I think the Minister should have met the representatives, and told them if he had any scheme, what it was. I know, from my reading of journals of public health in England, that the difficulty of co-ordination is great, and the more appointments made, the greater the difficulty will be. As a result of the stand made by the Galway Board of Health they were abolished. I do not believe that a better medical service could be got in any county as was got under the Galway Board of Health, and the Minister showed very little gratitude to the people who did that service. I can speak for the people of Galway when I say that they feel that the Board of Health was badly treated in that matter. I am glad that my friend Deputy Davis is here to speak on the question of the abolition of councils.

In connection with tuberculosis schemes I may be cynical but I am afraid that money spent on tuberculosis in Ireland is practically all wasted. Sanatoria are built and patients go to them, remain there for six or seven months and go home to infect everyone else in the house. They do not get cured. I may have a hopeless outlook but I do not believe that the money spent is of any use in the prevention of disease. I know from personal experience, within the last three or four years, three or four houses in which I attended people for tuberculosis. I sent the patients to sanatoria but they returned within three weeks and died at home. They succeeded in conveying infection to other people in the house. I have seen one man develop tuberculosis, going to a sanatorium too late, and returning home infecting someone else. Next year someone else in the house went and finally the house was left practically derelict. I have three or four cases in mind where a whole family was wiped out in this way. I do not see what good a sanatorium is to these people.

Deputy Sir James Craig and others spoke of the urgent necessity for houses in this connection. That subject has been, I might say, talked out. I want to point out that in the housing schemes in the rural slums in the West of Ireland there is no co-ordination. Although the housing scheme for the Gaeltacht is not directly under the Department for Local Government, still I think preference should be given to those people who live in infected houses, and the Department of Local Government should interfere. I know that a big sum has been allocated for houses in the Gaeltacht, but I know also that very little has been spent. I know that in practically every dispensary district there are nine or ten houses that should be burned, because they are impossible to disinfect, and if the Minister acquired the power, if he has not the power, to destroy those houses and erect houses under the Gaeltacht Housing Grant or whatever grant he likes I think a lot more work could be done than by all that is being spent on sanatoria in this country. It is rather hopeless to see people paying for a well-equipped sanatorium in a county and to see that after all no results are got. Whatever little good can be done in the housing line is not being done. I think the Minister should also try a little co-ordination in the slums, and try to get permission from the Gaeltacht Ministry to set aside a portion for these tubercular houses and to get on immediately. As it is at present the people are not able to avail of any grant. The Gaeltacht grant of £80 is of no use in cases where the head of the house is tubercular, and where the occupants cannot avail of it because they are generally down and out.

Something has been said by Deputy Corry and others about the expenditure on roads. It has been the cause of a lot of wonder why certain roads are selected as trunk roads and others are left in such a bad condition. In that connection I saw the President lately at a dinner said that we had the best roads in Europe. That is not very clear logic. We have the best roads in Europe, but the roads used by the ratepayers and the people in the country are probably the worst in Europe. Grass is green; all vegetables are green; therefore, grass is a vegetable. These roads are kept up for the tourist business. They are not the people who pay for the roads. If anyone visits the Minister's office, which I did on one occasion and which I do not think I will do again, and sees the maps there of the trunk roads, he will see immediately that the whole system of first-class and trunk roads radiates from Dublin and comes around again and back.

Mr. Davin

To Cork.

Dr. Tubridy

And to Galway. One would get the impression that they are simply built for tourists who arrive in Dublin and have a spin around the country and back again to Dublin. But those who pay the taxes and the rates are not getting any value whatever. I know that in Connemara, which is really a peninsula, the people exist along the seashore. The centre of this peninsula is a derelict waste. The British Government when they wanted to build a railway, instead of building it where the people live, built it through this waste. The Minister for Local Government when he wanted to make a road made it along the line of the railway into Clifden from Galway, with the result that the people living on the northern and southern sides make no use of that road at all. Of course, these roads in that portion of Connemara are very useful from the tourists' point of view and the scenery is very good, but there are no people living there. The only people who benefit are the owners of one or two hotels.

I know that it is rather late to expect the Minister to change his policy. I do not believe that he would change. I have heard it discussed that he believes that the roads should be built for the tourists by the people. The people who live here constantly and who pay motor tax for cars which they use in their business very seldom have occasion to use those main roads. They use the roads that lead to the villages and the county roads, with the result that this vast expenditure of money gives no return to us or to the people using the roads here.

Mr. Daly

I was amazed at the adverse criticism of the Local Government Department by some of the Deputies. I am a member of the Cork County Council and of almost all the boards in the City and County of Cork. I have great experience of the working of the Local Government Department and I say that they are 99 per cent. perfect. If they give me the £100 that we need for the hundred cottages that we want to build, it will make them a 100 per cent. perfect. I would like to point out that in the building of houses for labourers any rent over 2/- a week is too much for a working man, because of the wages he is able to earn at the present time in this country. We hope to get these schemes of cottages revived. It would help more towards the cure of consumption than any sanatorium.

I would also like to draw attention to the national schools. I live near a national school in my own village, and at times I pity little children coming down to the schools after coming in two miles, wet to the skin. They have to stand in school all day in their wet clothes. If that is not sowing the seeds of consumption I do not know what is. I suggest that there should be a room attached to each school for drying the clothes of these children. Deputy Sir James Craig pointed out that there should be recreation grounds in connection with schoolhouses. I agree. I put it into practice recently in a village in my constituency. A farm was being divided on which a big school was being built, and I got two acres of it from the Land Commission for a playground for the children of the school.

As regards the roads, the roads in Cork County I might say are the best in Ireland. One road there has been described as the best road in the world; that is the road on which they held motor races about six months ago and on which they broke records. The close co-operation between the Local Government Department and the County Council and other bodies in Cork is the cause of the success there. I defy anyone to say that the Local Government Department is not a complete success, as far as we are concerned, and, I believe, everywhere else. As far as my board of health is concerned I do not know how the ratepayers stand the payment for water supplies. The Local Government Department sometimes come to the rescue and give us a grant for these water supplies. They also give us grants for sewerage schemes and for the removal of dangerous corners. When we put a straight case to them they never refuse to meet it. I do not like praising them in their presence, but I do not think I would be doing my duty if I did not state my experience. I heard some Deputy state that the Minister did not prescribe the duties of the county medical officers of health. We have a county medical officer of health and we make full use of him. His immunisation scheme has brought comfort to the parents of the children. Everyone of them now is secure. They believe it, anyhow, and that is just as good as if it were true. Recently in my village all the children except one were immunised. A poor labourer who was too fond of his children would not let a child of his go under the operation and, unfortunately, that child became infected a fortnight ago. The Local Government Department also, through one of its inspectors, found out that the Mallow county home was not in good order. We were going to spend a sum of £9,000 on it, but there was a splendid mansion for sale, and the Local Government Department, I believe, invented a scheme. They got a community of nuns to buy this mansion and we send the sick and infirm into it under the care of these nuns. They are very happy there; they have plenty of ground to walk around every day. All that is due to the Minister for Local Government and his staff.

As far as home assistance is concerned, we have got home rule. We never have any interference or surcharges from the Minister or his staff, because in these times of unemployment they see that the necessity for giving home assistance is greater than ever it was before.

Mr. Davin

You are giving the case away.

Mr. Daly

I am not giving the case away. They allow it because they believe it is necessary. Deputy Law spoke about selling labourers' cottages. I do not at all agree with that. As ratepayers we would be shirking our responsibility to the labourers if we sold the cottages to them, because year after year we have to spend money in repairing these cottages, and these poor people would never be able to repair their cottages. The result would be that in 10 years' time you would have no labourer living in a labourer's cottage. They would all be bought up by pensioners of every kind. We are told this is a nation of pensioners.

Now I come to the doctors. I repeat that I am proud of the clean administration of the Department of Local Government. With regard to the Appointments Commission, I remember not very long ago a case in my own district in the county where we had two medical officers who were officers in the National Army, and another medical officer who was not in the National Army, applying for a position. It came up here before the Appointments Commission. I have heard it hinted that there would be some interference with the Appointments Commission. In this case the man who was not in the National Army was appointed, which shows the clean administration of the Department.

Mr. Corish

The Local Government Department has nothing to do with that.

Mr. Daly

Of course they have not. That is where the clean administration comes in. Instead of selling the labourers' cottages we intend to build more of them, and we hope to get help from the Minister and his staff in building them. Labourers cannot pay more than 2/- a week. The only way we could build them to let at 2/- a week would be to get a big grant from the Local Government Department. Then we will carry on a scheme which, to my mind, will eradicate tuberculosis, root and branch, out of the country. That, with proper water supplies and sewerage, is the best means of getting rid of tuberculosis, rather than sanatoria.

As far as the roads are concerned, they are excellent. As Deputy Corry said, we get back 40 per cent. of the expenditure on the trunk roads, and we are at liberty to spend that 40 per cent. on the by-roads if we like. On one occasion, I proposed to spend a sum of £29,500 which came back in that way to the county council and I was immediately pounced upon by the very people who criticise the Local Government Department in this House for not giving more money for the by-roads. Anyhow, we spent £16,000 on the by-roads leading to farmers' houses so that they would be able to get on to the main roads. The very men who criticise the Local Government Department are the men who objected to that £16,000 being spent. I had to force the matter to a division.

[An Leas-Cheann Comhairle took the Chair.]

Mr. MacEntee

I should like to refer to the peculiar situation which has arisen in County Dublin in connection with the allocation of money for relief work. Out of a total grant of £300,000 provided by the Dáil for that purpose, I think the Minister only allocated something like £1,800 for County Dublin. The position in regard to County Dublin is a special one. Up to 12th October, I think, public health administration in the county was in charge of five rural district councils, which, under the Local Government (Dublin) Act, were abolished. The Board of Health had its first meeting on 25th October, and the Dáil, shortly afterwards, voted the £300,000 for relief work. The Board of Health, at its second meeting, submitted to the Minister a considerable number of schemes dealing with public water supplies and sewerage. For instance, a scheme for a water supply to Finglas, a scheme for a water supply to Lucan, and a number of other proposals were placed before the Minister. I understand the Minister refused to consider these schemes as special schemes for the purpose of the grant on account of the fact that none of them had been independently initiated by the present Board of Health. Every one of these schemes had been considered by the Rural District Council for the special area concerned. All of them were considered very carefully—some of them over a long period. Some of them had been worked out in detail, and they were schemes which, if they had been sanctioned by the Minister, and if the Board of Health had been assisted to carry them through, would have returned permanently good value for the money expended upon them.

I cannot see the force of the Minister's objection; I cannot appreciate the principle upon which he acted. The Board of Health came into being in special circumstances. The District Councils were maintained in existence in special circumstances. They were merely used as warming pans until such time as the Board of Health could be constituted after the reorganisation of local government in County Dublin consequent upon the enlargement of the city boundary. If these schemes have been initiated by the Rural District Councils, which were superseded by the Board of Health, I submit that the Minister should have taken into consideration the fact that, if it had not been for the passage of the Local Government (Dublin) Act last year, those Councils would have been applying to him through the County Council in the ordinary way for portion of this relief grant, and would have applied upon the basis of the schemes which were subsequently submitted to him by the Board of Health. I do not think that the Minister has any justification for the attitude he took up, and the matter has become a very serious one in County Dublin, where unemployment, want and destitution are just as widespread as in any other county. The farmers are just as badly hit, there is just the same scarcity of employment and the same urgent need for these water and sewerage works. It is surely a disgrace that an important and popular centre like Lucan, a residential district which shortly will be absorbed in the city, is still without a water supply. The same thing applies to Finglas and to Rush and Lusk. In every one of these cases, I believe myself that the cost of the scheme would be prohibitive, and could not be borne by the ratepayers unless they received some assistance from the Department of Local Government and Public Health.

There is just another matter that I should like to refer to which does not relate to my own constituency, but as to which it would be no harm to emphasise what has already been said. In my professional capacity I have occasionally visited county and mental hospitals and other public institutions in the country. I certainly think it is time that the question of local hospital accommodation both for ordinary and mental patients should be seriously considered by the Department. Many of these hospitals are housed in altogether unsuitable buildings—mental and county hospitals particularly—in converted workhouse buildings long out of date.

My own personal belief is that while mental hospital committees and other local authorities are anxious to modernise these institutions and are prepared to spend the ratepayers' money on them, nevertheless there is, on the whole, a very inadequate return for most of that capital expenditure on equipment, beds, and other things, largely on account of the fact that the buildings are out-of-date and cannot be modernised. I think the problem ought to be tackled and that there should be an investigation and examination of each of them. First of all, I think that the administration of the mental hospitals should be co-ordinated and there should be some uniformity of dietary and general treatment of the patients. I would not interfere with the Resident Medical Superintendent's discretion in the matter of medical treatment, but so far as the dietary, general maintenance, comfort, and upkeep of the patients are concerned, there should be uniformity. There should also be uniformity in the grading of the staff. In addition to that, there should be a general examination of the whole question to see whether there might not be co-ordination and a certain amount of centralisation in administration and some sort of economy secured so far as the mental hospitals are concerned.

The same applies in relation to the county hospitals. I understand that the Minister for Justice contemplates introducing a Bill which will permit these county hospitals to come within the scope of the Sweepstakes Act. I do not wish to commit myself to an opinion upon that at present, but I do say that if that is going to be done, and if there is going to be any further capital expenditure upon equipment, a good part of the money will be wasted unless some attempt is made to modernise the buildings in which the equipment will be placed. I know of cases where the patients in those buildings are in grave danger. I know many of them which I believe from the point of view of the possibility of fire are very dangerous, and I know some of them where it would be virtually impossible if a fire originated to cope with that fire in any reasonable time and to prevent it from developing seriously, and secondly, if it did develop, to rescue the patients. There are buildings where there are wards opening into each other on different levels and long, narrow staircases, where it would be almost impossible, no matter how great the sacrifice, or how heroic the efforts would be, to remove patients from those hospitals in such circumstances. These hospitals, because they are old and the large amount of timber in them, both as partitions and flooring, are buildings where a fire could originate very easily. I think the special department of the Minister dealing with this particular question ought to investigate that problem very carefully and see whether he could not get modernised buildings for county hospitals and mental institutions generally throughout the country.

Mr. Shaw

This is a Vote on which one could talk on many subjects that might occupy so much time that would make it impossible to deal with all of them in anything like the way in which they should be brought forward. Therefore I propose dealing with only a few subjects. In connection with the roads, I hope that any change that may take place in local government administration will ensure that the charge of the roads will be taken over by the State. At the present time in the County Westmeath, and in some parts of Longford, the ratepayers are paying 2/- in the £ for the upkeep of the roads, and a great many of those ratepayers do not benefit by them at all. Motor lorries and every other class of vehicle are to be seen carrying six, seven, eight, nine and ten tons of cement and coal, and timber and cattle, and every other class of goods along those roads, breaking them up by their great weight, and the ratepayers have to pay for their maintenance. No doubt the Local Government Department have given increased grants for the maintenance of these roads, but the sum given is unable to keep them in repair. Probably the very best work the Executive has ever done, since they took over the government of the country, has been the making of the magnificent roads such as those from Dublin to Cork, Dublin to Galway, and elsewhere. When the £2,000,000 grant was being expended magnificent roads were made, but they are not able to stand the traffic on them at the present time. I put it that the ratepayers who have to pay this considerable sum of money for the upkeep of the roads and many of whom have not motor cars and do not use the roads in any way, except to walk on them or to drive a pony and trap, should be relieved of that particular liability. You can meet a train on the roads at the present time. Anyone who comes to Dublin as I do, by motor car, from Monday morning to Saturday night, will see trains running on the roads and not on the railways, with every possible conceivable heavy article in them.

In connection with roads, I would suggest that there should be co-operation between the county surveyors and the home health inspector. In the County Westmeath we had to pay up to £12,000 a year in home help. Many of the persons receiving it are married men with large families, but as they are getting on, and are now between 50 and 60 years of age, they are debarred from getting work on the roads because they cannot pull their weight. They have to be given home help in order to maintain their families. I hold that a very considerable amount of money could be saved if these men were given a fair proportion of the work that they are entitled to.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is not that a matter for the local authority?

Mr. Shaw

I think it is not. I was the proposer of a resolution at the Westmeath County Council that married men with large families should get the first preference and single men with dependents should get the second preference. That resolution was altered, and at present there are more single men than married men on the road. In anticipation of an interruption that would say they are ex-Army men, may I say they were not.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That does not arise here. It is a matter for the local authority.

Mr. Shaw

Well, I hope that the Minister, when there is any change in local government, will take over our roads. There is one other matter that I would like to draw attention to and that is the losses sustained by farmers and others owing to the slippery nature of the roads. I think the Minister on a former occasion said that if it were put to him that he ought to introduce legislation to allow compensation to be paid to farmers who lost their cattle by slipping on the roads, he would consider it. I ask him to consider the matter, because in the county I come from very considerable losses are sustained in that way. On one occasion on a fair day in Mullingar two cattle belonging to one man were injured by falling, and many others belonging to other people. They receive nothing in the way of compensation, and it is very serious for people unable to bear that loss at the present time.

There is another matter I would like to draw attention to, and that is that proper fire fighting appliances should be supplied to the various towns throughout the country. At the present time the fire fighting appliances in many towns in Ireland are primitive in the extreme. Some day there will be a serious outbreak of fire in some town without adequate fire fighting appliances, losses of life and property will occur. I think the Minister should make it compulsory on local bodies to strike a rate sufficient to provide funds at least for hoses and whatever other apparatus is required, so that if a fire occurred something could be done to cope with it. In many places at present if a fire occurs there are no apparatus available to put it out.

The Local Government Department has been attacked perhaps more than any other Department in the country, and one of the matters on which it has been attacked is in regard to the various appointments made by the Appointments Commission. I shall give one example.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

By whom were they attacked?

Mr. Shaw

The Westmeath Board of Health was threatened with a mandamus by the Local Government Department because a certain doctor was not appointed.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I would like to see how the Deputy is going to put himself in order on this matter.

Mr. Shaw

The Westmeath Board of Health was asked to appoint a doctor recommended by the Local Appointments Commissioners for the area called Coole district. The Westmeath Board of Health declined to make the appointment and made all kinds of accusations against the doctor, the Local Government Department and against the Appointments Commissioners.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Surely that does not arise upon this Estimate.

Mr. Shaw

I shall say no more than this——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy ought to put himself in order.

Mr. Shaw

I think I am in order.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy has hardly been in order since the beginning of his speech.

General Mulcahy

The Deputy is delighted to have the doctor.

Mr. Shaw

The doctor got first place in Ireland, and the same Board congratulated him unanimously six months afterwards, which proves that the statements were untrue.

Mr. Davin

Are you not a member?

Mr. Shaw

Yes, I was in the minority. I proposed that he be appointed, but I do not think that I got a seconder. I want to say again that the Local Government authorities have been very unfairly attacked on many occasions. I must say that whenever I brought anything before them or went on a deputation in connection with any knotty subject, I was always received most courteously, and anything we suggested was given careful consideration and, if possible, carried out. In some cases we were refused, but in others we were successful. If a case is laid before them properly and if a deputation brings complaints to their notice, I say without fear of contradiction that they will be given a fair hearing. A good deal of the criticism at public boards directed against the local government authorities is unjust and unfair. There are many other subjects, such as hospitals, infirmaries, and other matters, about which one could speak, but I do not intend to do so at this stage, because I understand the Minister is going to introduce a Bill to deal with them. I was hoping to see that Bill introduced this week and, when it does come, I will have a good deal to say about it. The hospital accommodation in Westmeath is certainly in a very serious position. We have had to refuse many patients and have had to ask the ratepayers for large sums in the past, but I hope that the new Bill will allow us to participate in the Manchester November Handicap Sweep so that we will be able to come along from the point of view of capital expenditure and meet a very serious situation. A Housing Bill, about which I could talk at length, is to be introduced.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy ought to wait for it.

Mr. Flinn

Wait for the November Handicap.

Mr. Shaw

I do not think that I would be out of order in talking about that Bill.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Perhaps I should explain to the Deputy that he would be completely out of order in advocating or discussing any legislation whatever.

Mr. Shaw

If that is the case I had better conclude, but I wish again to state that most of the criticism directed against the Local Government Department is unfair and unjust. While I am of the opinion that we have been badly treated in Westmeath and Longford, in regard to the allocation of grants, I feel it is my duty to pay a tribute from these benches to the manner in which the Minister and his officials have carried out their duties since their department was established.

Mr. Everett

I am not in the same position as Deputy Shaw and Deputy Daly, who congratulated the Minister and his officials on the manner in which they carried out their duties during the last twelve months. I will give instances to show that the policy of the Minister's Department is completely at variance with public opinion. The Minister is well aware of the fact that it was the public bodies, supported by the civilian population along with the armed forces, who brought about the freedom which we enjoy to-day. The Minister may go a distance in fighting and flouting public opinion but I am certain that before very long the public will take matters into their own hands, and will not be driven into accepting every ultimatum which he sends to public bodies. I will give one instance, at least, to show how unfairly public bodies are treated by the Minister and his Department. Public bodies have really no control. The Minister received several lessons even in the Courts where his decisions have been reversed. Notwithstanding that, he often tries to interfere illegally with public bodies. In my constituency an urban council passed a resolution authorising a halfpenny rate for library purpose, but at the following meeting, when the members realised that they were transferring their powers to the county council, they handed in a notice of motion to rescind that resolution. Then a letter arrived from the Department telling them that they had no powers to rescind it. Is there any other place in the world where public bodies have to put up with such dictation as in the Twenty-Six Counties?

Last night the Minister stated that responsibility in connection with Grangegorman rested on the representatives of Louth, Wicklow and Dublin. I was a member of that body when the Minister or his predecessor sent an instruction, on the advice of the General Council of County Councils, to reduce wages, and I was one of two members who refused to vote for the proposal on the ground that the Minister had not the power to reduce them. Notwithstanding that, the Minister last night tried to pretend to the House that responsibility for that rested on the members of that body. They accepted the advice of the Minister's predecessor just as they accepted the advice given by the present Minister to delay the striking of the rates in order to allow him to bring in his contemplated Bill declaring the decision of the Courts to be illegal. How many letters have been sent to public representatives on the contributory bodies asking them to postpone the striking of rates so that the employees would be deprived of their wages? Thanks to the Independent members of this House, who hold the Government in the hollow of their hands, they refused to support the Bill and, therefore, it was not introduced, but if the Minister had his way it would have been introduced and we would probably be in a different position to-day.

We hear a lot about rural housing. Last year I had occasion to bring forward in this House a very serious indictment—one of the most serious, in my opinion, that has ever been brought here—in connection with the action of a Local Government inspector who was sent to hold an inquiry in regard to an application to build houses for men whose homes were washed away in Greystones. The inspector had a conference with the people who opposed the building of the houses. His agents had been there previously and, though they were defeated at the inquiry, the inspector found out afterwards that the railway company contemplated building a line on the site at some future date. That was only one of the excuses which the inspector had for preventing the board of health from building houses for the workers, and the very men who opposed the erection of houses were afterwards promised the field to build houses for a certain select body in Greystones. The proof of that fact is that although the Minister would not permit the board of health to acquire the site he has now sanctioned the building of houses there by people who opposed the board's application on behalf of the workers. That shows how frivolous was the excuse which the inspector made after the inquiry was held. I never before heard of an instance in which a decision was given otherwise than on the evidence submitted to the inquiry. That, however, happened on this occasion. The Minister promised to give us his assistance in securing the field at Greystones, but he was only trying to support the action of his official who was transferred from his previous place to Wicklow. After twelve months, at the last moment, the board of health have procured a field, but they have to decide what will be the price. It will, I expect, be much dearer than that arranged under the voluntary agreement come to previous to the Minister's inspector refusing to give the board the right to build houses on the other site.

We have heard this evening about tuberculosis schemes. The members of this Party opposed the transfer of the work of the insurance committees to the boards of health. We have justified ourselves in that attitude inasmuch as the Minister has now ordered that tubercular patients, advanced cases, are not to be accepted in hospitals. He puts the liability on the board of health to maintain them as paupers, whereas heretofore they were given assistance at least by the insurance committee. In domiciliary cases, by the Minister's order they must receive domiciliary treatment, not as a right under the insurance committees. The patients are now treated as pauper patients and given pauper treatment of 5/- a week. We have a very good tuberculosis doctor in my county, but I say that in such cases we are beginning at the wrong end. I have fifteen or sixteen years' experience of the work of tuberculosis committees, and I say that in the last two years, notwithstanding the Minister's statistics or the doctors' statistics, tuberculosis is on the increase as a result of unemployment, starvation and bad housing. I need only refer the Minister to the report of the county medical officer of health for proof of that statement. He states that the majority of the children whom he examines at present are suffering from malnutrition and are underfed. That statement refers to the majority of cases which came before the county medical officer of health during the last twelve months.

What is the Minister doing to help to stamp out this dreadful disease? Is he doing his part in providing proper rural housing? Let us go into the villages or small towns. Will we see any new houses there? We will not, because the boards of health or the town commissioners are unable to build houses on the terms suggested by the Minister. They are unable to accept the Minister's terms of a loan for ten or fifteen years. We have in County Wicklow over 300 plots in our possession for a number of years awaiting the erection of houses, and the tenants are paying a small contribution to try to retain possession of these plots until such time as the local bodies are able to get loans or grants to build the houses. The Minister stated on the last occasion that the workers were unable to pay the rent of such houses. I think he had in mind the fact that these workers were not entitled to receive anything more than 25/- or 30/- a week for work on the roads. Even the much-detested Government which the Minister did his part to rid this country of, in their schemes for the housing of rural workers, held that the rates should bear their proportion of the rents of these houses, just the same as the general body of ratepayers bear the cost of the default by farmers who are in arrears with their rents. They held that on account of the workers in rural areas having such a small wage it was a concession to the agricultural community that the agricultural worker should be enabled to get houses at a small rent, as the farmers were not able to pay him a sufficient wage at that particular time.

We have heard now why some county councils did not receive their due share of the recent grants. We heard from Deputy Daly that all went into his constituency. He got grants for roads, housing and other purposes. In fact, Cork seemed to have got all the money, and therefore other areas were deprived of their share. There is an explanation, of course. We have the President of the Executive Council representing a Cork constituency. That explains why Cork receives favoured treatment. Notwithstanding the small grant which the Minister gave my constituency of Wicklow, the Minister held that it was in an exceptional state of distress on account of unemployment. Notwithstanding the fact that the estimate of the Board of Health was £12,000 in 1929, it had to be increased to £16,000 last year, and within the last three weeks home help has been paid at an average rate of £18,000 per annum. There was a grant of £5,000 or £6,000 given for the provision of sewerage and other works, but such works will only give employment to seven or eight men in any area, and by an order of the Minister's Department or another Department, it is not the men who are receiving home help or the men who are drawing the donation, but the men who belonged to the National Army who are to get first preference on this work.

I would point out to the Minister that as a result of his actions in connection with Grangegorman Mental Hospital he has put a rate on the unemployed. A sum of over £3,000 has to be repaid by the people of Wicklow. Even the home help has to be paid by the unemployed person, or the person in receipt of 5/- a week relief, because when the rates are increased either by the county boards of health or the county council, the rates are increased in many cases by 4d. per week, and that 4d. per week extra has to be paid by poor men who are in receipt of 5/- or 6/- per week, which is the average sum given in relief in my area. That would give the Minister some conception of the distress that prevails. He is very keen on having extra officials in the country and in having due consideration given to their salaries, but when it is a question of a few working men, the Minister or his Department has no regard for the men engaged in manual labour by public bodies. He has failed to bring in a Bill to give any concession or benefit to men who have a long employment with public bodies, but it is not so with other officials.

I have no complaint to make in regard to any person appointed, but I do complain that the Appointments Commissioners allow too long a delay to take place from the time a vacancy is first notified to them until the appointment is made. It takes six months before an appointment is made in some cases. The Minister and his Department have now sanctioned the building of houses in Greystones on the very field on which they refused to allow workers' houses to be erected before. I would ask the Minister to remember, notwithstanding the criticisms we have made against him, that if he does not change his policy, the people of the country will change it. Public men will be prepared to stand up against the attitude of the Department in interfering unduly with public bodies who are endeavouring to do their best, in spite of the difficulties they have to contend with.

There are many other things that could be said, but much of what I would say has been said already by other Deputies. I appeal to the Minister, if he is sincere, to bring in some measure that will bring relief to the worker in the rural areas, and that will give him some hope that a house will be built for him. I say this because, notwithstanding the various public bodies we have in the area, there is not one public body with whom I am acquainted that is not anxious to receive facilities from the Minister. If they do they will support a housing scheme which will absorb a large body of workers in the rural areas. I know the Minister has a particular attitude in this matter of rural housing. He has taken up the attitude of the General Council of County Councils. He seems to take his instructions and his views from that body instead of from men more in touch with the public. The General Council of County Councils put up some time ago the policy of the sale of cottages. They pointed to what a great loss it is to the rates, and they put up a red herring there, so as to prevent the Government giving the same facilities to boards of health —that is the extra subsidy that urban areas have. Why should not a man living in a rural area receive the same facilities as the man who happens to live in an urban area?

On the question of Old Age Pensions, I would like to point out to the Minister the unfairness of allowing the pension officer to place a high valuation upon bits of land, or on live stock on a couple of acres of land. The pensions officer has always supported as far as I know the view of the Local Government Department in the matter of these high valuations on the little things that the applicant for a pension possesses. The pensions officer probably does not understand conditions in rural areas, and he places an unduly high figure upon the value of various commodities. I am ruled out on the question of the right of representation to the Minister. That will come on at another date.

The Minister should speed up the hearing of all old age pension appeals. I submit that where two responsible people sign a declaration as to the age of a claimant that that declaration should be accepted, instead of having the Minister putting the applicants to the inconvenience to which he puts them in connection with their claims. I am aware of one case where two persons signed a statement that the applicant was over 70 years of age. She was unable to procure her baptismal certificate. Fortunately, after a lapse of twelve months she was lucky enough in being able to secure it, and that certificate bore out the statement that had already been put before the pensions committee. She got her pension from that date, but as she should have been getting it 12 months before that she lost a considerable sum. If the Minister carries out his policy, I will, while I am on public boards fight him, and I will have plenty of people with me in trying to prevent him from acting as a Mussolini, as he is acting at present.

Mr. T. O'Reilly

I intend to confine myself mainly to the question of the dissolution of the Kerry County Council, but Deputy Fred Crowley dealt with that matter very ably—

General Mulcahy

For the Deputy's information I may tell him he did not say one word about it.

Mr. T. O'Reilly

He gave any amount of figures dealing with it anyway.

Mr. Corish

The Minister is anxious the Deputy should tell him about it now.

Mr. T. O'Reilly

Deputy F. Crowley omitted to state that during the last year of office of the late Board of Health there was £4,000 spent on the Dingle hospital, and the Deputy was chairman then of the Board of Health. One of the ostensible reasons why the Kerry County Council was dissolved was that the Dingle Peninsula had no representation on the Board of Health. This expenditure on the Dingle hospital goes to show that the Dingle Peninsula was not neglected by the Board of Health. One other item he also omitted to state, and that was that three-fourths of the cottages were repaired before the Commissioners came into office. In the Budget for the present year the Commissioner estimated that he would have £2,500 more in cottage rents than the old Board of Health had. If these figures are taken in conjunction with the figures given by Deputy Crowley, the House will see had the old Kerry Board of Health continued in office, everything being equal, they would have a budget of £2,500 less than the Commission has for this year.

With regard to the efficiency of the Board of Health I want to say that Dr. McCormick was down there last year and he voluntarily stated that, on account of the excellent sanitation and the water schemes in existence in Kerry, that county had the cleanest bill of health in Ireland. One would imagine that the Minister had some reason for dissolving the Kerry County Council. That reason could not be a financial one, because the ratepayers in Kerry are not a bit better off financially under the Commissioner than they would have been if the County Council had continued. As for the sanitation of the county, Dr. McCormick's evidence is quite enough. Then the Minister had some reason for dissolving the County Council. I think I have got the reason. The County Council in Kerry made an appointment of a solicitor. They appointed a Republican solicitor. The Minister made another appointment, but the Kerry County Council would not bow the knee to the Minister. Hence they were dissolved.

With regard to housing in the small towns in the country districts where there is no urban authority, I consider that a serious problem exists which should engage the attention of the Minister. The Gaeltacht Housing Act does not meet the situation. I think some scheme should be evolved by which the housing problem in those small towns might be solved, especially in regard to the poorer classes of the people.

I would like to say a word about the county home. It is very hard for old people to leave their old surroundings and travel perhaps 40 miles to the county home. To some of them it is the same as transportation. I think Deputy Broderick spoke about that. It is very heartless to find people leaving their surroundings in the midst of which they spent their lives and leaving the old home, which perhaps in 90 per cent. of the cases they will never see again. I think it was a great mistake to decide on having one county home for the whole of Kerry anyway.

With regard to school meals, I say that there was an unfair discrimination in the selection of schools in the County Kerry. I know very poor districts where school meals are not given to the children. In fact, I might mention the very poorest in Kerry—Keel and Glencar.

I want to say that the by-roads in my county are in a deplorable state. It should be the duty of the Government to keep the main roads so that the money passed by the County Council should be devoted to the by-roads. I do not see how people in remote districts gain anything by the trunk roads and by the large sums of money expended on them. They know that Englishmen, American tourists, people from Cork and Dublin, tear up those roads. What will a man living 20 miles from a hotel gain by that traffic? It is the money contributed by these people that is maintaining these roads. Yet the roads they use themselves are in a bad way. One will find the ribs coming up through these roads. In one case I know that a horse broke his leg in a road kept up by the Kerry County Council. It was a by-road.

Deputy Daly mentioned something about surcharges. He should have no surcharges in Cork. If he went down to Kerry he would get bundles and baskets of them. With regard to the labourers' cottages, I do not see why the labourers should not be made the owners of their own cottages in the same way as the farmers have become the masters of their own farms. I see no reason why that should not be the case.

With regard to the old age pensions, I wonder does the pensions branch take cognisance of the fact that butter is now only two-thirds of the price it was two years ago and, therefore, the value of the cow should, for means purposes, be estimated at two-thirds of what it was valued at two years ago. I think the value that the pension officers put upon a Kerry cow at the present time is altogether too high. I hope the Minister will note that butter, in my place, is now only 8d. per lb., while two years ago it was 1/-, and I trust he will instruct his officials to estimate the value of cows, when calculating means, in like proportion. I am afraid that the officials in the pensions branch do not take sufficient notice of these things when they are assessing means.

I would like to emphasise the dreadful condition of the by-roads in Co. Kerry. I know the county well, and I know that the by-roads are in a frightful condition. There are some roads, too, affected by erosion, and they are being rendered dangerous for traffic. The sea has taken away seawalls and has left many places absolute death traps. There were two serious cases already in consequence of roads being thus affected, and I brought them to the notice of the Commissioner. No action has yet been taken. I hope the Minister will take proper notice of these things.

Mr. J.X. Murphy

I have heard some of the speeches this afternoon and I do not think it is quite fair to pillory the Minister because he has not provided enough houses. After all, it is really a question of money, and the Minister knows that if money is to be procured for this purpose it means increased taxation of some sort. I think, however, that this question will have to be tackled on a large scale in the near future, and I think it is worthy of the Government's consideration, for it is really a Government matter, whether we might not as well face the problem now, once and for all. I believe that £10,000,000 would go a very long way towards solving this problem and building the houses that are necessary. I think a Government housing loan ought to be floated, and at the present moment it certainly could be floated at 4½ per cent. The interest would be about £450,000. Some of that will come back in the way of rent. I do not say that the people who will go into the houses will have to pay what you might call economic rents, but I do believe that in view of the terrible scandal of children being brought up in hovels and insanitary dwellings, which simply breed tuberculosis, that the people, generally, would be prepared to make sacrifices in the way of some taxation in order to try to help these poor children to grow up into strong and healthy citizens of the State.

Mr. Corish

It is certainly encouraging to hear a Deputy of the standing of Deputy Murphy advocating the acquisition of a large amount of money by the Government in an endeavour to solve the housing problem. Something like that has been advocated from these and other benches for a considerable time. It has been suggested that housing should be attacked from a national standpoint. I am not one of those who will say that the Local Government Department has done nothing for housing. There is no use in denying that that Department has done a good deal for housing within the last six or seven years. I am in touch with the Housing Department as much as anybody else in this country and I apperciate the help I got from that Department. But much more work remains to be done. Up to this only the fringe of the problem has been touched.

I am afraid a sort of standard has been set up so far as rents are concerned, and that standard will prevail for a considerable time, notwithstanding the tendency to reduce the wages of the workers. The result will be that in a great many cases the local authority will find it difficult to secure the rent which of necessity they now have to fix as the economic rent of the houses they are building. I suggest the Minister should seriously consider Deputy Murphy's suggestion. It would not even be such a burden on the State as Deputy Murphy suggests. I believe the money could be got at less than 4½ per cent. from the banks at the moment. The governing rule for local authorities borrowing money from banks is that they get the money at ½ per cent. less than the prevailing rate. The rate at the moment is 4 per cent., and if the banks were prepared to advance money for housing to the extent suggested by Deputy Murphy at 3½ per cent. it would go a long way to solve the problem.

There need not be any burden on the State if housing is tackled as it should be and if the public authorities applied themselves in that direction. A great many of the local authorities are themselves to blame. I am speaking now of urban authorities. They are not applying themselves to the problem and they are not taking advantage of the facilities that are to hand, poor as some of them are, in order to help to alleviate the housing shortage.

Mr. J.X. Murphy

I hope that Deputy Corish did not misunderstand what I said. I did not suggest that the Government would get the money from the banks. I suggested that the money should be got from the people of the country.

Mr. Corish

I have heard it advocated here this evening, and I heard it also on other occasions, that the Government should extend the local loans for the purpose of carrying out rural housing. In my opinion, that would go only a short way to solve the problem of rural housing. In fact, it would go no distance at all, because if houses are built in rural areas to-day, and if the rent is more than 2/- a week, the labourers will not be able to pay the rent and, in the end, the erection of the houses will be a mere waste of time and money. Even if a house costs only £200 the rent would be in the vicinity of 5/- or 6/- a week, and nobody will suggest that the rural labourer is in a position to pay anything approaching that sum.

Certainly rural housing does want attention. When I speak of rural housing I do not altogether mean cottages in isolated areas, although some of these are required too. There are large villages and small towns in the various counties, which are rapidly deteriorating because of the fact that so many houses in them are allowed to fall into decay, and are not being replaced. I have in mind places such as Ferns, Camolin and Taghmon, in my own constituency, where within the last ten years houses have been falling. No effort has been made by anyone to have them rebuilt. The Minister should give some attention to these places. I think it is absolutely essential that he should send down some of his inspectors with a view to finding out what the housing shortage is in these particular places, and of getting something done in the way of providing houses in the rural areas. County boards of health have no facilities to enable them to do anything in that way. Some of them, as I said before, have asked that urban facilities should be extended to them, but they are practically useless, and, in my opinion, the people who ask for these facilities for rural areas, know very little about the housing problem.

There is another matter that I wish to ask the Minister about. I raised this on the last occasion when the Estimate for his Department was under consideration. I am anxious to know what he proposes to do in the matter of having fever hospital accommodation provided for the town of Wexford. The people in that town are very much concerned about this. You have a population of over 12,000 there, and the people are left without a fever hospital. The Minister made some kind of a promise this time twelve months that something would be done. The time for doing it is long overdue. I feel that disease is being cloaked in the town of Wexford to the detriment of the general body of the inhabitants. There is very little use in appointing county medical officers of health in any county unless adequate hospital accommodation is also provided. We have a county medical officer for Wexford but the town is left without fever hospital accommodation. I hope the Minister will see to it that the county board of health will provide immediately that accommodation for the town.

We all know quite well that parents are very reluctant to have their children sent into hospital, even when there happens to be a hospital in the town in which they live. When it comes to a question of sending children a distance of twenty or thirty miles to a hospital the parents in such cases will be more reluctant still to send them there. The Minister knows that quite well. Everybody knows, and especially medical men, that people in such circumstances are inclined to cloak disease with the result that in many cases the children die. In other cases, if not in all, the disease spreads more rapidly than it would if suitable hospital accommodation were available locally for the treatment of patients.

In Wexford county at the present time there is a scheme in operation whereby able-bodied men in receipt of home help are expected to do certain work in the grounds of the county hospital and county home at a rate of, I think, 6/- per day. I do not object to that scheme. As a matter of fact I agree with it. I think it is a very useful thing that men should be made work for the money they receive. What I do object to is that if any of these men are unfortunate enough to have an accident, if one of their limbs is broken or if they meet with an injury to their eyesight in the course of their employment, no provision is made to have them paid any compensation. I have in mind the case of one man who lost the sight of his eye for a couple of months. This occurred last year. He made application for compensation, but received none. He brought his case to court, but it was ruled out on the plea that the Minister had decided that these men were not insurable. I think the Minister will agree that is not a right attitude for anyone in his position to take up.

After all if a man is unfortunate enough to be temporarily unemployed and finds it necessary to make application to the county help authorities to provide him with a day's work each week for which he is paid 6/-, and in the course of his employment loses a limb, I think it is very unfair that for the remainder of his life he should be left in a condition whereby he is unable to earn a living for himself and his dependents, and all because the Minister objects to any insurance being taken out on that man's behalf. I would suggest to the Mini- ster that he should reconsider that matter.

I am in thorough agreement with the scheme for the medical inspection of school children and the appointment of county medical officers of health. A county medical officer of health has been appointed for the County Wexford. I must say that he is a splendid type of young man. He is very enthusiastic in his work. He has cooperated wholeheartedly with the public bodies and has done magnificent work since the date of his appointment. We find that it is much easier to carry out sanitary and water schemes since he came to the county. I would suggest to other counties in which a county medical officer of health has not yet been appointed that they should take steps to appoint one at once. The county medical officer of health certainly gives great assistance to the members of public bodies in the carrying out of their duties, particularly in regard to sanitation and water supply schemes.

With regard to the roads, I have always disagreed with the section in the 1925 Act which provides that an urban authority should pay a flat rate for the upkeep of main roads. I do not make that objection from a selfish point of view. In a great many cases urban authorities are prepared to levy a higher rate for the maintenance of trunk roads in their area than the county council is disposed to approve, but they are prevented from doing so by the operation of this section in the 1925 Act. What happens in a great many counties is that the county surveyor submits an estimate specifying a certain amount of money for the upkeep of main roads. The county council, in what they describe as a spirit of economy, indiscriminately cut down the estimate without paying any regard whatever to the state of the roads in the urban areas. The estimate for the roads in the urban areas is cut proportionately, although these roads require more attention usually than the roads in the rural areas. An urban authority is also entirely dependent on a county council as to whether or not it will get a grant for doing some particular work on trunk roads in an urban area. I do not think that is right. When it can be shown to the Minister and his Department that an urban authority is in favour of levying a higher rate for the maintenance of trunk roads in its area, I think it ought to get the advantage of any grants that are available, just as much as the county council area would. These are the only points that I wish to deal with. I would again remind the Minister that more serious attention should be paid to the question of rural housing than has hitherto been paid to it and to the housing of workers in the large villages and small towns throughout the country.

Mr. T. Sheehy (West Cork):

I rise to say that in my opinion no case whatever has been made for referring this Estimate back. I appeal to the five Labour Deputies whose names are attached to the amendment not to press it to a division. I ask them to think of the serious consequences that would follow if the amendment were carried. It would mean doing serious injury to vast numbers of their fellow-citizens. It would mean depriving them of their positions and of the wages they are earning now. We had a very favourable atmosphere here last night when Deputy Seán T. O'Kelly to my surprise and delight begged and hoped that the Minister would, by the work in his Department, show an example to all Europe. I thought the Deputy would never leave the old land—that his policy was an unreal one—but last night, he came around very much to our way of thinking and suggested that the way we are administering legislation here under the tricolour would be an inducement to other nations to follow our example.

My colleague, Deputy Murphy, was very severe in his criticism of the Minister but, at the same time, I was very proud to hear him say that the people were grateful for some of the work that had been accomplished for the poor in our constituency. There is no doubt whatever that when a case is put up to the Minister he is sympathetic. It is only within the last few months that the Board of Health in West Cork planted twenty agricultural labourers in twenty new cottages which they let at 2/2 weekly, thanks to the consent of the Minister for Local Government. This is a very big question affecting a vast number of our people. The workers, and the sick in the hospitals will suffer if the members of the Labour Party will not do the magnanimous thing on this question—avoid a division. Deputies know perfectly well that the Minister is sympathetic about the proper housing of our people. The Government has given £1,500,000 for housing within the past six years, notwithstanding the attacks and the criticisms that have been indulged in. During the three years that I have been a member of the Dáil the same attack has been made on this Department each year. After that experience I say that we are advancing, and that Deputy O'Kelly is coming to recognise things. One and all should join in the name of the poor, the afflicted and the sick in supporting this estimate. Let us be united and pass it.

Mr. Walsh

I have been informed that a change has been made recently in the manner of paying money granted for the erection of houses. People entitled to the grant got money in the past in instalments as the building progressed. I am informed that the money is not now given until the engineer gives a final certificate. When he is replying, I would like the Minister to deal with that question. I would also like him to inform the House when time will be given to discuss the motion on the Order Paper in the name of Deputy Ruttledge and myself dealing with the Mayo County Council.

Mr. Davin

Deputy Sheehy's moving appeal, which every Deputy is prepared sympathetically to consider, has forced me to speak. As the representative of a local authority, I want to ask Deputy Sheehy to say if the policy of the Minister in dealing with rural housing is satisfactory to him, so far as the Minister has been able to assist him, in the last three or four years.

Mr. Sheehy

As far as my experience in West Cork goes there is no occasion on which we approached the Minister that he did not come along and help us. I have no doubt that if the West Cork Board prepares another scheme he will not be wanting in his sympathy or support. That is my view, whether the Deputy believes it or not.

Mr. Davin

The Deputy must have read or heard what the Minister said some time ago, that 40,000 houses were badly needed in this State. If the Deputy is not aware of that, will he read the records of the House? If he does he will be able to inform himself that the housing policy of the Minister for the last three or four years has only provided 227 houses in the rural districts.

Mr. Sheehy

Where is the £1,500,000 gone? Surely the Minister did not swallow it?

Mr. Davin

Does Deputy Sheehy seriously suggest—and I am sure the Deputy wished to defend the Minister —that 227 houses meet the situation which we know exists in regard to housing in the rural areas?

Mr. Sheehy

The Deputy is after stating that some people are remiss towards labourers and towards agricultural workers. Why do they not be up and doing? His colleague stated that in the urban areas the people were remiss and did not do their duty to the workers. How can the Minister be blamed? It is ourselves we have to blame if we are not up and doing. I must say that Deputy Davin is active, but at times he makes terrible mistakes.

Mr. Davin

Unlike Deputy Sheehy, I am not infallible. The figures are there and the Deputy will see that they prove conclusively that the Minister's Department has only helped so far to provide 227 houses through the agency of the boards of health for people in the rural districts. Let Deputy Sheehy think that over seriously. Perhaps he will then change his mind regarding the so-called help that this Department has given towards housing the people.

Mr. Sheehy

In my town three streets have been built.

Mr. Davin

I feel certain that Deputy Sheehy has done one man's part as a public representative in West Cork, and that under the circumstances he has done his best in the difficult position upon which he is called to act as a member of the board of health. Does Deputy Sheehy seriously suggest that boards of health can take on building schemes on the basis of a loan for fifteen or sixteen years, and let the houses at rents that the people can afford to pay?

Mr. Doherty

Why not?

Mr. Davin

Good old Donegal!

Mr. Sheehy

I think it is unfair to ask such a question. I am prepared for the Deputy's question as I have fifty years' public experience behind me, and years of solid work. When I am dead and gone there will be a monument behind me. Anyone who goes to Skibbereen will find Ninety-eight street and Home Rule Terrace. Will the Deputy take me down to his town and show me what has been done there?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Let us hear Deputy Davin.

Mr. Davin

Does the Deputy seriously suggest that all the houses built in Skibbereen have been built with the assistance of the Board of Health and through the agency of the Department of Local Government meets the needs of the people there? Does he say the same with regard to every other town in West Cork?

Mr. Sheehy

The houses were built over the last forty years.

Mr. Davin

Why this eloquent appeal to Labour Deputies not to oppose the Vote and to withdraw the amendment?

Mr. Sheehy

Because I think Deputies would be doing good work for the workers if they did so. I can assure the Deputy that the workers do not endorse his action.

Mr. Davin

I can agree to differ with Deputy Sheehy on many things. We have the Minister's figures before us— and figures prove a good many things— that there were 84,396 people drawing home help throughout this State during the financial year ending the 31st March. In the interests of the ratepayers of West Cork would it not be far better if we could provide the £10,000,000 that Deputy Murphy suggested in order to supply houses badly needed, and to take able-bodied people off the rates by giving them work?

Mr. Sheehy

Float your loan for ten millions.

Mr. Davin

I realise the position which Deputy Sheehy finds himself in. He cannot speak against the Minister and he is bound to stand up and support him in anything he says.

Mr. Sheehy

I was sent here to do a man's part and I am doing it, sir.

Mr. Davin

While I differ in many respects from the policy of the Department and the Minister for Local Government, I must say I have no personal complaint to make against the Department or any of its officials. I certainly think the policy of the Minister and his Department is wrong in so far as he continues to call upon the rural ratepayers to find 2/- to 2/6 in the £ valuation for the maintenance of the trunk and main roads in this country. I would like to hear from the Minister whether he has any other policy than that, so far as the maintenance of roads is concerned. I think the Minister will find, on looking more carefully into the whole matter of road maintenance, that it would be more economical in the interests of the people to remove the responsibility for the maintenance of those roads from the county councils or other local authorities and to hand them over to some central authority. The Minister, in answer to a question I addressed to him yesterday, stated that the amount received in road motor taxation for the last financial year ending 31st December amounted to the sum of £882,000. In addition, we know that the Government also receives a sum of in or about £600,000 per annum from import duties raised on cars imported into this country. I strongly object to the policy of the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Local Government and of the Ministry as a whole in collecting the money derived from that source and setting it aside for the relief of general taxation. I say that whatever sum should be derived by that means, either now or in the future, should be set aside with the sum raised by way of motor taxation for the maintenance of the main and trunk roads of this country, and it should be administered by a central authority.

We know perfectly well that every rural Deputy will admit that the average farmer in the country cannot drive his cattle, horses or sheep along the main and trunk roads in the country in safety, in the same way as he used to do five, ten or fifteen years ago. The average farmer is driven mainly on to the by-roads for the purpose of getting his cattle in safety to the nearest fair, or wherever he is driving them. In any case I disagree with the present policy of the Ministry in imposing a rate of between 2/- and 2/6 in the £. on the rural ratepayer, for the purpose of maintaining the main roads, seeing that these people who are called upon to pay that high rate are not getting the service they are entitled to, and the use of the roads that they used to get five or ten years ago. I want to say that as far as my knowledge of the administration of the Department is concerned, that it has given encouragement and financial assistance to the Boards of Health and local authorities who expressed willingness to provide waterworks and sewerage schemes in the areas where they are badly needed. In my own constituency the failure to provide these schemes is merely due to the local authority concerned, and to a certain extent to the opposition of the ratepayers in the localities concerned. At any rate I appreciate the extent to which the Department has given those loans and grants during the past two or three years. I want the Minister to look into the cases in which the local authorities are willing to put up such schemes for which he has loans. It is impossible, in my opinion, for the schemes to be carried out and the whole of the money found by the ratepayers in the areas concerned. The Minister, in the present circumstances of the people, must know that the provision of waterworks and sewerage schemes is an important one. I hope that in the future, in cases where Boards of Health and the authorities concerned are willing to provide these schemes that he will provide grants to relieve rural ratepayers, and enable them to carry out any schemes that are required.

Mr. O'Doherty

Would the Labour Party facilitate that?

Mr. Davin

I certainly have given every facility and encouragement, and I incurred the displeasure of many electors in my constituency because I encouraged it.

Mr. O'Doherty

Certainly I believe you have, but I do not believe your Party facilitated it.

Mr. Davin

I do not know any member of my Party who has not taken the view I have given expression to.

Mr. O'Doherty

I will give you particulars if you like.

Mr. Davin

There is one local matter I would like to bring under the notice of the Minister; that is the present uncomfortable and insanitary condition of the County Home at Mountmellick. The County Home there, from what I have seen of it, is unfit to house horses, let alone house the poor in the declining years of their lives. I understand that certain differences of opinion exist between the Board of Health concerned and the Department as to whether the County Home should be repaired or whether a new home should be provided in Mountmellick or some other suitable centre. That dispute has been going on for the past three or four years, and the poor people are still compelled to live in a building where horses should not be housed. I would like to impress on the Minister the necessity for looking into that case, to get into consultation, and, if possible, to try to arrive at an understanding with the local authority at an early date and to provide some better conditions for the housing of the aged poor in that particular county. I would like that the Minister, as he has done in other cases, when he is in that part of the country, would pay a visit to the place and satisfy himself that the conditions I have described are the conditions under which these poor people are compelled to exist.

Mr. Carey

I would like to pay a tribute to the working of the different departments which the Minister controls. Those of us who have been associated with public life for the past 24 years find a different type of legislation from that under which we worked under the old regime. We have made great progress in the matter of housing and in other directions, and if we have not done more it has not been the fault of the Minister but of those who have been elected to local boards. The Department has helped by means of long term loans and in other ways. The local Boards are unable to wipe out the slums in urban districts because of the increase in rates which it would cause. The Government have provided us with the necessary legislation, and it is for the public boards to clear the slums and provide proper housing accommodation for the people.

Provision has been made for the medical inspection of school children, but we have not the means of sending affected children to institutions for treatment after the inspection. Legislation in that respect is necessary. Further, if school children are not living in healthy homes medical inspection and treatment will not meet our purpose. In connection with the building of houses, sites should be obtained in healthy surroundings. There is one thing I do complain about, and that is the time that is taken up in correspondence. Letters are going backwards and forwards and it would be much better if the Department would send down some responsible official who would settle the matter on the spot. I was pleased that Deputy Corry was so lenient towards the Minister because he always put up a more or less hard case against him. I am sure the tenders for the milk for the Cork Union have smoothed the surface. Deputy Murphy was afraid that it was in the Minister's mind to curtail local administration. If it is, we are responsible ourselves, because we are not taking advantage of the Acts that have been passed. Under the present administration of urban councils hawkers can come into the town from different parts of the country without, perhaps, licences in some cases, and out-manoeuvre the local business people. When that is so there is no use in saying that we are administering the law properly. I believe that the people who are paying rates in the towns are entitled to certain rights, and where these hawkers come into towns they should pay certain rentals on the stalls they occupy. If the urban councils put exorbitant rents on these stalls the law is there to protect these people. If this thing is allowed to go on it will mean that the local traders will have to close up, and the local authorities will be deprived of the rates that they pay. These people buy bankrupts' stock and goods from Jews, and they can come in and sell in opposition to the local traders or go round the country and sell to the farmers.

Take the Apprenticeship Bill.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That has nothing to do with the Estimate. The Deputy is wandering away from the Estimate altogether.

Mr. Carey

I am sorry that I have been led into another channel, but I was dealing with local government administration in our towns.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister is not responsible for the matter to which the Deputy was referring. It is not a question of administration arising out of the Estimate. What the Deputy is seeking would require legislation, and it is not in order to advocate that on an Estimate.

Mr. Carey

I bow to your ruling. As far as the administration of local government is concerned, I have nothing to say against it. Only for the way in which the officials of this Department carry out the administration things would be in a very bad way. There is necessity for supervision over the provision of meals for school children and other matters pertaining to the well-being of the youth of the country. The Acts dealing with these matters have been carried to a certain point and they end there. We will have to get some guidance from the Minister in respect of the future treatment of these children. Deputy Davin spoke about county homes not being supervised as they should be. These homes are run by committees. Deputy Davin complained of certain things. It is the committee of these homes that are at fault and not the Minister. If certain things are to be done they should do them. Deputy Davin and others who make these complaints should put them before these committees and see that these things are carried out. I was surprised at Deputy Murphy moving that this Estimate should be referred back, because he has got more from the Department for the people whom he represents than any other Deputy, including myself. He has said that things are not done as they ought to be done. After all, Deputy Murphy has got more for his constituents from this Department than any other member of his Party. He is very well able to put up his case to them. In conclusion I would ask the Minister to take seriously into consideration the question of the treatment of school children, as I am deeply interested in that matter. The doctor examines these children in the schools and prescribes certain things to be done, but the matter ends there. I ask the Minister to go further than that and to make some provision by which, when a doctor gives a certificate that certain things are necessary to be done, a child can be taken to some dispensary, or other place, where the necessary medical attention can be given.

Mr. T. Sheehy (Tipperary):

I wish to draw the attention of the Minister to the necessity for giving long-term loans for the building of labourers' cottages. There is a very big demand from genuine labourers in my constituency for housing accommodation. They have already made application to the Board of Health in one particular district. There is a very great need for housing in the towns and villages in that area. These men are prepared to pay a fair rent for these houses, but without the aid of long-term loans the Board of Health is unable to build these houses to let at a reasonable rent which the labourers would be able to pay. I also wish to refer to the condition of the main and trunk roads. Provision should be made so that the farmers and other ratepayers would be able to travel in safety on these roads when driving a horse or an ass, as the case may be. At present on most of these roads it is almost impossible for a person to drive with safety. They are quite suitable, of course, for motorists.

I also want to refer to the autocratic manner in which the Local Government Department fixed salaries for certain positions under local authorities which are much beyond the capacity of the ratepayers to pay, after the local representatives have laid down salaries which they think are reasonable. That has happened in some cases in my constituency, and I think it is very unfair. The local representatives should know the local conditions and the capacity of the people to pay. I should also like to draw attention to the necessity for sewerage and water schemes for villages and towns in rural areas. In some instances in my own constituency such schemes had to be dropped, owing to the inability of the ratepayers in the dispensary areas to meet the costs. I urge the Minister to make provision for helping to finance these schemes, which are very much needed.

Mr. Connolly

There are one or two matters I would like to bring before the Minister. One of these is in connection with the Road Board Fund. The Road Board Fund is entirely collected from the motor car users, and its application in general is recognised as being concentrated on the public highways. That is quite all right up to a certain point. Of late a great many farmers in the country have motor cars and use the trunk roads very little. Their contribution to the Road Board Fund is considerable, and I think that a considerable sum out of that Road Board Fund should be diverted to the maintenance of county or main roads. They receive no benefits from the contribution and having regard to the condition of the main roads or the sub-main roads it is not fair to have all this money expended on the trunk roads of this country. I think the trunk roads of the country in general are very good and in some instances more than good. We could do with a little less. They have assumed the position of what one might call speed roads.

By allotting sums from the Road Board Fund to the main roads of the counties we would be relieving the ratepayers of the responsibility in supplying the entire sum for the maintenance of those roads. That is, I believe, a matter that should get consideration in the near future.

I should like to call attention to the housing schemes, which are assuming very large proportions at the present moment. Where housing schemes are carried out in towns throughout the country they enhance the valuation of the town. The poor rate of the county is assessed on the gross valuation, including the housing scheme, with the result that though assessed on the gross valuation the collecting authority of the urban area are only allowed to collect in the first year one-twentieth of the gross rate on the particular housing scheme. But in return the county council must receive twenty-twenties, which is the whole of the rates on the entire valuation. Hence the balance must be collected off the remainder of the population in the urban area. That is a very serious matter for people living in urban areas. It will leave them in such a position that they will not be able to pay the rates demanded of them in the near future. It is most unfair to expect where there is a large housing scheme being carried out which might increase the valuation of the town by £5,000 or £10,000 or any sum of money, because assuming the rate is 10/- in the £, it means an enormous amount of money has to be collected in poor rate in that particular town. The urban councils have no jurisdiction over the poor rate and they have to collect on the entire valuation. That is a matter in which the urban areas will have to get relief, otherwise they cannot carry on under a system which is most unreasonable and unfair.

With regard to our local and public services in general, from my experience going through various other countries in Europe I do not think any has anything like the public services which obtain here in Ireland. Our services are first-class services. But high-class services must be paid for, and at the present time they call for an enormous rate. In my opinion we ought to go a little slower than we are going at the moment.

There is no office or service, for whatever purpose launched, but requires a considerable amount of rate to be raised to defray the cost. While it is highly desirable to have these high class public services, and while everyone would like to have them people will have to realise that they must cut their cloth according to their measure, and live within their means and ability to pay. We cannot go on having these things, however desirable, without increasing the cost of living, and the farmer at present is not in a position to live up to the demands required of him for those public services. I consider it would be only fair that we should go a little slower in many respects.

With regard to the relief of unemployment, I pointed out before that in my particular constituency we got a very small contribution. I do not know who was responsible, but taking it in general, I do not feel satisfied that as one of the contributing areas to the taxes of the country, a reasonable sum was distributed for the relief of unemployment in my constituency. I shall take another opportunity of dealing with this matter, and try and ascertain what is the reason that there was such discrimination between this particular area and other areas. I hope that when Estimates are being introduced for other public services this matter will be borne in mind and that any loss sustained by not having a proper grant given to my particular county constituency will be met by having provision made for works to be carried out there which were submitted to the Local Government and other departments and which should have been carried out under the unemployment scheme.

Mr. Moore

I have no intention of prolonging this very long debate, but I cannot miss the opportunity of asking for information about a very interesting new item which appears in the Estimates this year under the heading of "Temporary Staff, Roads Research Assistant, £85." I would like if the Minister would tell us what that signifies. The Minister cannot expect to get a lot of research work done for £85 a year. As a matter of fact this is only a part-time official with an inclusive salary of £250 a year. It is true that great movements have had very modest beginnings. This modest beginning may result in a great movement. I think that road research is very much needed, that there could be a lot more done in that respect, but I cannot see much being done on £85 a year. I would be interested to hear that this is simply an experiment and that if it produces favourable results it may be expanded. In that connection, I think, that some of the moneys spent on other matters connected with roads could have been better spent on research. For instance, I can see no reason for sending a delegate to the International Roads Congress held in the United States of America last year, a congress which was described by every paper that mentioned it as one of the most useless and ineffective congresses ever held on a technical subject. I cannot see why the Saorstát needed to be represented there, why they required to send a delegate 6,000 or 7,000 miles to hear papers which are always published afterwards. It would look as if the money spent on that could have been much better spent on research.

There is a further question in connection with roads. It seems curious that the Minister, having nearly £1,000,000 to disburse this year, should not be able to afford any contribution towards the most important tourist road in the country, a road that is in an extremely bad state and which will probably be traversed next year by many thousands of people who will be visiting the country for the first time. That is the road to Glendalough. There is no use in saying that it is the fault of the Wicklow County Council or anyone else. It was admitted here by the Minister, when the £300,000 grant was proposed, that Wicklow was a county which would have to get special attention on account of the grave unemployment prevailing there. Obviously the ratepayers cannot be blamed if they are unable to put up all the money required for road purposes. Seeing that that road is of such great national importance, I think that the Minister could well have afforded to earmark a few thousand pounds out of the Road Fund to put it at least in better repair than it is in at present. As he must know, it is not one of the roads that you would like to include when talking, as many people do, about the splendid roads which we have in the country and how much they are admired by visitors.

With regard to the general question of road expenditure, I would like the Minister to say whether his Department is following the policy laid down in, I think, 1926, to the effect that farmers should not be expected to contribute more proportionately than what they were contributing in 1914, that the amount to be demanded from them was only to be in excess of the amount demanded in 1914 in proportion as the prices which they were getting for their produce were in excess of those which they got in 1914. I do not think that the Minister can hold that that policy has been adhered to since it was first laid down in 1926. It was emphasised very strongly by the Minister for Industry and Commerce in 1928, and was evidently regarded as a considerable concession to the farmers. If the Minister can justify it by any statistics I would be very interested to hear them.

General Mulcahy

Deputy Murphy, in moving that this Vote be referred back, seemed to lay particular stress on the want of sympathy on the part of the Department with local bodies in its administration and on the desire on the part of the Minister, at any rate, to get rid of local bodies. Generally that string has been harped on by many Deputies who spoke here. I think that it must be perfectly clear to even Deputy Murphy, and to every other Deputy in the House, that such work as we are doing and which brings us into what appears on the surface, at any rate, to be disputes with local bodies is work and action taken by the Department for the purpose of securing that local government in this country will exist, that it will be laid upon secure foundations, and that there will be put into the hands of bodies acting as local representatives and shouldering responsibility for local policy a machine and persons of technical and administrative capacity capable of enabling them to do their work. I do not think that there is a single Deputy in the House who, in his heart, has any doubts about that. If we could get down to an appreciation of that we could do something in the matter of criticising the administration of local government, whether from the departmental side or the side of local bodies, that would considerably improve many things that require to be improved in the country and effect considerable economies in a country where economy is very necessary. When I come face to face with members of local bodies and when members of local bodies come face to face with officials of the Department their outlook on matters of policy and their objectives are fundamentally the same.

Deputy Murphy speaks of the rapidity with which local bodies have been suppressed, and either he or other Deputies mentioned Kerry, Galway and Mayo. I think it is perfectly clear to anyone who listened to the discussion, and the contributions to the discussion by Deputies Crowley and O'Reilly, from Kerry, and Deputy Dr. Tubridy, from Galway, that as far as these counties are concerned my action in either of them is not seriously challenged. I do not think it necessary to develop that matter further. Local representatives, who here or at their own council meetings, are able for particular purposes to indulge in a certain type of criticism, to make certain complaints, and to hold up the Department in certain lights, know that the Minister responsible for working with these local bodies cannot exactly indulge in what would be, in many cases, appropriate back chat on the subject. We ought to carry on our discussion with that appreciation. In the appointment of county medical officers of health we put into the hands of local bodies technical officers. I think any county councillor who has experience of their work and their functions, and of the assistance they give in visualising all their problems and in carrying out the wishes of the councils when these wishes are formulated, will have to echo the words uttered by Deputy Corish here. When Deputy Murphy criticises us for developing the county surveyor as a county engineer, responsible for the supervision, the co-ordination and the direction of all engineering matters in the county, I do not think he does justice to his own outlook on the matter.

Deputies here demand that roads should be taken over by the central authority. Other Deputies ask that when an inspector goes down to a district, not only should he deal with the problem of roads there but that he should fix up anything that needs to be fixed up in regard to drainage, water supplies, institutions and housing. Some Deputies will argue that any engineering inspector should deal with all these matters locally, but the chief engineering officer of a county must not, apparently, be asked to supervise the administration of these matters in his county. I do not know what particular aspect of Deputy Murphy's remarks Deputy Crowley challenges with regard to the engineering system in Kerry, but I am quite satisfied that the organisation of the engineering services under the control of the county surveyor, will bring about very great efficiency and bring many economies.

I would reply at this point to Deputy Shaw and other Deputies who suggest that road administration should be centralised and that the main roads should be worked from a headquarters department here. Apart from its being possibly less economic, in the matter of roads alone I think it would lead to a very great want of development of engineering power throughout the country. No central department without a very big staff could do within the last few years what has been done on roads here. There are some of our county surveyors who, perhaps, were not quite fitted for the responsibility that came upon them, but certainly for the most part they stood up splendidly to the work that has fallen on them. If the county surveyors were taken over as the machinery of a central department, we would lose the key to the development of a county engineering staff which is one of the things we desire very much.

Again, in regard to the relations between the Department and local bodies, much of the body of complaint that Deputy Murphy appears to make against the Department, was a slurring over of what amounted to criticism of local bodies themselves. I think that the Department has done a considerable amount to bring pressure on local bodies, within their means to make the best of the old buildings that have been left with them, and which are suitable for district hospitals, county hospitals, and county homes. If there has been neglect in that matter it must be laid primarily at the doors of the local authorities. There have been local authorities in the country who have taken these old institutions and with the devoted assistance of the staffs belonging to these institutions, and in making suitable use of some of the inmates there, have transformed the institutions from what they were. I cannot see why, if one local body in the country can transform these institutions in that way, something more cannot be done in other places. When the Deputy speaks of home assistance as it were in terms of criticism of the Department he is criticising the local bodies.

Mr. Murphy

I admit that to some extent, but where does the Minister's responsibility come in?

General Mulcahy

The Minister's responsibility does not enter into the matter.

Mr. Murphy

At all?

General Mulcahy

Not in the matter of home assistance. The Deputy complained that schemes, such as schemes for the blind are not uniform throughout the country. They are uniform throughout the country, and County Cork is the only place in which they have not been properly organised. I am told that the Department has written something like twenty-one letters to the local authority in County Cork since 1927 about the institution of a proper scheme for the blind. The Deputy glossed over his remarks like that in such a way as to suggest to Deputy O'Kelly that the Department is going to do something to improve the present scheme. Deputy O'Kelly was simply misled by the kind of light gloss and the want of detail on the part of Deputy Murphy in his picture of the situation because he was attempting to criticise the Department while actually criticising the local body.

The energy, the industry and capacity of thought of the officers of the Department who deal with these matters are such that there are no pains they will spare themselves and there is no trouble they will not go to in order to help the local authorities to visualise their problems properly and to make whatever efforts seem reasonable within the capacity of these local authorities to deal with these matters. Deputies ought to get out of their minds that the Department is treating local authorities in an autocratic way. I ask Deputies not to be misled by some of the statements made here and by some of the very superficial discussions around the tables of local bodies.

When we fix the salary of a county secretary, a county engineer or a county medical officer of health; when we insist that there shall be a filling of the vacancy by reference to the Local Appointments Commissioners, we are not acting in an autocratic way but we are carrying out a system which has been steadily pursued from the time this Government came into office. We set up a national standard of qualification and a national standard in capacity for administration for those positions that are pivotal for those positions, and those positions must be filled by capable and qualified men if local bodies are to be put into a position to carry out their work satisfactorily. There have been opportunities of criticising the action of the Department because a particular decision was being insisted upon. The soft pedal was kept on the complaint until they saw that the Minister and his Department were determined to send the thing to the Local Appointments Commissioners. When they thought that the situation was quite safe and that they would get men selected on their ability, then the tongues of criticism were less freely loose around the table for the benefit of some local officials who were anxious to be promoted. The local authority was doing the good fellow when the situation had been made quite safe.

In dealing with that particular type of criticism I would like to refer to some remarks made by Deputy MacEntee. Deputy MacEntee complained that the Dublin County Council had a grievance against the Department because it did not get a fair share of the relief grant that was given. I appreciate that the Dublin County Council only came into being late in the year. But the relief grant was voted for a particular purpose, for the purpose of giving employment during a particular time of this year. We were depending on the local authorities sending forward schemes and information with regard to unemployment in their areas. A very considerable part of the grant, as far as local government was concerned, was allocated well before the middle of January. It was into February before we got any request for assistance from the Dublin County Council. It was also in February that we got their schemes. I do not understand Deputy MacEntee's references to Lucan and Finglas in connection with these schemes. A sewerage scheme was put up for Skerries at a cost of £20,000, and a scheme of waterworks for Rush and Lusk at a cost of £15,000—a total of £35,000. That was late in February.

It is the policy of the Government, when large sums of money like that are involved, to give the local ratepayers, through a local inquiry, a chance of examining details of the scheme in order that a considerable amount of money will not be imposed on them for new works, where, as is true in many parts of the country, there is a distinct feeling on the part of a certain number of the ratepayers that a certain amount of hesitancy is necessary where schemes involving large sums of money are concerned. There was no possibility, in any reasonable sense within the terms and intentions of the grant for £300,000 for Relief Schemes, of getting in the Dublin County Council's schemes. Deputies really cannot do for county councils or for boards of health the work that is proper to these bodies. There is nothing to prevent the County Council in Dublin dealing directly with the Ministry. In fact, it did deal directly with the Ministry in the discussion of these things. It is only departing from its own dignity and lowering its own prestige when a local body fails to approach the Ministry directly and frankly and in a responsible kind of way.

It is lowering to the dignity and prestige of any public body to parade Deputies before them and ask them to do their work. Deputy MacEntee does not appear to be fully informed of the situation. I appreciate his difficulties in the matter, and I just draw attention to the type of thing which comes up. It does impress Deputies who are not closely associated with local bodies that there are grounds for criticism against the Department.

There has been a certain amount of discussion about labourers' cottages particularly, and about housing and roads. I fail to see in any part of that discussion a criticism of the Department's administration. It is only a setting out of the opinions of the different Deputies—a valuable setting out of their opinions on problems that are very big and very vital. I appreciate that rural housing is important and that a rural housing policy is necessary for the purpose of flanking our urban housing policy. I am quite satisfied complaints can be made with regard to urban districts to the effect that where houses are built and bad houses evacuated, if there are not residents in the towns to come into these bad evacuated houses unfortunate people from the country, sometimes of the tramp class, come into the towns and take possession of the insanitary houses and add to the urban population, and add a particular type of uneconomic class to that urban population.

Deputy Sheehy mentioned that in West Cork 20 labourers' cottages have recently been provided and the occupants of these cottages are able to enjoy them at a rent of 2/- a week. They are only able to enjoy them at 2/- a week because the rest of the ratepayers of West Cork are providing 8/- a week to help them out, and because the State is providing 1/10 a week to help them out. I admit that is on a 15 years' loan. Assuming that the West Cork houses were built on the loan the urban districts are getting from the Local Loans Fund the local authority would, nevertheless, have in these circumstances to pay 5/3 a week for the next 35 years to help every single owner of these cottages, and the State would have to provide 1/3. Rural housing is wanted. Not only is rural housing wanted for the people who have not labourers' cottages at the moment, but Deputy Murphy wants that these labourers, who are in the position that they have only half an acre, should get a whole acre. In Kerry we still have the position that at least two years of rents for cottages are outstanding. I do not say that all the holders of cottages there have not paid their rents, but I do know that the amount of rents outstanding in Kerry must extend at least over two years.

Other Deputies want cottages handed over to the labourers and made their property in some way or another, with great benefit to the local body and with great benefit to the tenants. That is the way they want it done. If the cottages are handed over to the tenants at their present rents, who is going to pay the £5,000,000 outstanding loans on labourers' cottages? I do not suppose the pressure in regard to cottages in Louth is any greater on the local body than it is elsewhere, but in Louth an examination was made in respect of 1,036 cottages that were built for labourers. The tenants were found to comprise, as well as agricultural labourers, road workers, fishermen, sailors, shopkeepers, dealers in eggs, fowl, cattle and pigs, masons, carpenters, tailors, shoemakers, painters, bakers, postmen, insurance agents, railwaymen, clerks and conacre farmers. The rent charged for the cottages averaged 1/- a week. In a few cases the rent was 1/6 or 2/-. Faced with the problem of how they were going to meet the increasing cost of maintaining these cottages, the board decided that in the case of 190 of them the rent would be increased from 1/- to 2/- rather than put an increase of 6d. on all the cottages. I understand there is going to be a rent strike. It is in these circumstances that there is a demand for the raising of a big local loan for labourers' cottages.

Deputies have asked that these things be discussed in a non-party spirit and surely it is a problem sufficiently big to be discussed in a non-party spirit. None of the Deputies who have spoken on the matter have attempted to come down to any kind of suggestion. Deputy Davin is particularly anxious about it, but he does not offer any kind of suggestion as to what rent labourers should pay, who should pay the other part of the money, or how houses can be built in rural areas at a cost that will enable us to build the houses that require to be built without bankrupting the country as a whole. In the towns there has been, owing to the opening of the Local Loans Fund, a quickening of the building of houses, but the cost there is big. The problem there is also pressing, and when we are called upon to deal with a pressing urban problem and a rural problem, we are forced up against a situation like this: Let us take Clonakilty, in the neighbourhood of which they built some rural cottages and some urban cottages. If the rural cottages were built at the same price as the urban cottages, then the tenant would pay 2/- a week, the State would contribute 1/3 and the local authority 5/3. In the urban district the all-in cost of the labourer's cottage is £320 and in the rural district it is £305. In the urban district the tenant pays 6/8 a week as against 2/- in the rural area; the State pays 1/6 as against 1/3 and the local authority pays only 1/6 as against 5/3.

As regards the problem in the towns, there is certainly, on the money side of things, a very decided pressure to deal with the urban problem and leave the rural problem waiting. That is a consideration we have to take into account when we are seeing in what particular direction we are going to raise moneys for the solution of the housing problem. In urban districts we want houses. Deputies have spoken of the necessity for providing playgrounds for children. We have to face, in connection with any new housing policy, the extent to which, if we are spending public money, we are going to spend on amenities of a very necessary kind outside, such as playgrounds for children and space for the halls, schools and churches that are essential. With the attitude that is taken up in relation to rents, with the cost of houses and the necessity for making provision for amenities and for necessaries in the district besides housing, Deputies will have seriously to review the size and the type of housing accommodation that they are going to have provided, and the rents that they are going to demand and that the people will pay. We have got in rents. I think, a wrong standard at the present moment.

Deputy J.X. Murphy suggested to us that all we wanted was a loan of ten million pounds. That gets us nowhere until we firmly fix in our minds what rents we are going to charge and what our housing costs are going to be like. When we settle these things, then we can talk of money. Unless we firmly fix these things, we are going to find ourselves in a certain number of years' time in respect to urban housing in the position in which we find ourselves with regard to labourers' cottages at present: that is to say, very small rents and no tendency on the part of local authorities to face the question that some of these rents are too small. You have the position of a very big debt in some areas, rather incompetent supervision and the incompetent carrying over of arrears. If we appear to be hard in our outlook on housing it is that we want to firmly fix the foundation upon which such an important scheme as urban and rural housing will be built.

Mr. J.X. Murphy

The Minister, in speaking about the difficulties, referred to this matter of the ten million pounds. Would not a housing commission go into that question and report upon it and determine the points the Minister is in doubt about?

General Mulcahy

I do not think that our people require a housing commission to suggest what rents should be paid for housing to-day in any town in the country. I do not think that a housing commission would do anything to reduce the cost of house-building.

Mr. Anthony

Would the Minister believe in a rent-fixing commission? He must be aware of the profiteering that is going on. I gave an instance of it this evening. Deputy Murphy's question is quite a pertinent one, and should be answered by a responsible Minister.

General Mulcahy

I am not prepared to suggest that a committee of investigation into the housing position would bring us anything but talk.

Mr. Anthony

They can profiteer away so.

General Mulcahy

I am really addressing myself at the moment to building by local authorities, and I do not think we can take a discussion outside that at the moment.

Mr. Carey

Might I interrupt the Minister for a moment?

An Ceann Comhairle

It will get to be the fashion after a bit.

Mr. Carey

I know where houses are let by urban authorities at 3/- a week, and when persons get married these tenants let one room to them at 4/- a week.

Mr. Good

Ten shillings in some cases.

Mr. Corish

The people who do that ought to be evicted.

General Mulcahy

Deputy Moore spoke of the way in which the Department prevents county councils spending money on county roads, and insist on their spending money on the main roads. I do not think that in any case the Department has interfered with a local body and insisted on its spending more money on main roads, except in cases in which the local authority was advised by its own technical officer that more money than it was prepared to spend was necessary for the roads. It will not help our county roads or minor road situation if we let our main road scheme go down for want of proper maintenance. I think I mentioned that the percentage of money that local authorities were spending on roads now was 80 per cent. above what they were spending in 1913-14. In reply to Deputy Moore, I would say that is higher than the figure he mentioned as being laid down as a kind of principle. We are restricted in the way in which we are able to reduce the cost of road maintenance in the case of local authorities by the amount of money available to us in the Road Fund.

One of the Deputies from Kerry was wondering why so much more money was allowed for roads in County Dublin than is allowed in County Kerry. The Deputy who raised that may have been referring to the amount of money per mile allowed in Kerry and in Dublin for the national road scheme. Recently we had an examination of road costs with county surveyors, and I do not think that for any mile of road in County Kerry the county surveyor put up a figure of more than £1,300. If the Deputy is referring to anything other than the amount of money allowed to the national road scheme, then all I have to say is that the Road Fund, in so far as maintenance is concerned, is distributed amongst counties alike; that is 40 per cent. of the total amount of money they spend on the maintenance of their main roads. The amount given to county councils in respect of improvements is based upon the same formula in Kerry as it is in Dublin; that is to say, population, expenditure from the local fund, the valuations, the amount of motor licence duty collected, main road mileage, and the way traffic is ascertained in the last traffic census. So that there is no discrimination as between county and county in the matter of the allocation of the road fund.

Certain remarks were made by Deputy O'Kelly in connection with the Dublin Union, and I think the Dublin Commissioners. The work that the Commissioners did in cleaning up the administration, as far as it required to be cleaned up, in the Dublin Union was very great. I will welcome any efforts that the present local authority in Dublin make to perfect the work that was so well begun by the Commissioners. It has been suggested in this debate, and was said outside before by persons who ought to know better, that the Commissioners in Dublin increased the load of debt on the City. In Dublin City, the loans outstanding on March 30th were £4,310,954 as compared with £2,832,773 in March, 1924, or an increase of £1,578,181. As a matter of fact, the amount due on the 30th March included the sum of £520,370 in respect of the electricity undertaking for which the Corporation are indemnified by the Electricity Supply Board. The difference as I have pointed out was £1,578,181. The amount of the increased indebtedness in respect of housing in Dublin borough in that period was £1,459,835. The difference is made up by a very considerable increase in the productive debt of the city. In fact, the unproductive debt of the city was reduced by £100,000.

A number of small matters have naturally been raised by many Deputies that it would be impossible to reply to here. The main thing I want to get clear about is that the criticisms that Deputy Murphy seems to want to put up against this Estimate have been founded more on the criticisms of local bodies than criticism of the Department. The main points around which difficulties and differences arose between the Department and local bodies are points that the Department insisted upon, in order to preserve, and to make effective, local government, so as to reduce the labours falling on the shoulders of those people in local areas who undertook to carry out the work of local government.

Mr. O'Kelly

Might I ask the Minister if it is not the fact that an auditor of his Department reported to him and to the local authority that a contractor and an official of the Dublin Union were responsible, between them, for robbing the ratepayers of a very considerable amount of money and incidentally probably robbing the poor. I would ask the Minister if that is not a fact, and if he proposes to take any action in the matter.

General Mulcahy

As I said the Commissioners cleared up a very great lot of difficult work in the Union. The auditor's report shows that there was a certain amount of inefficiency and incompetency on the part of a storekeeper on the one hand, and on the part, say, of dispatch clerks of some of the contractors on the other hand. I do not accept the Deputy's description of anything that appears in the auditor's report as robbery, and I do not think that an inquiry is called for in the matter.

Mr. O'Kelly

Is it because the contractor is a well-known pillar of Cumann na nGaedheal in Dublin that you are not holding an inquiry?

General Mulcahy

No.

Mr. Corish

I asked the Minister questions in regard to fever hospital accommodation in Wexford and the insurance of workmen.

General Mulcahy

I am not prepared to say anything about the insurance of workmen, and, as far as fever hospital accommodation is concerned, I think the Deputy will find, following an examination of the position in Wexford by our inspectors, that a communication will be sent within a day or two— if it is not already gone—to the Wexford Board of Health.

Mr. Cassidy

Might I ask the Minister if I am right in inferring that his policy in regard to housing is that the Department is going to deal with the housing in cities and the urban areas but that nothing is going to be done in the rural areas. In other words, there is no policy at all for the building of additional labourers' cottages.

General Mulcahy

I am prepared to hear anything from the Deputy as to how the position with regard to labourers' cottages in the rural districts can be improved.

An Ceann Comhairle

But not now.

Mr. Cassidy

I will be glad to give the information.

Dr. Ward

I would like if the Minister would state how he proposes to deal with houses in rural areas which are unfit for human habitation which are now occupied by small farmers and uneconomic holders which I referred to in my speech to-day. I would like to know if the Minister has any policy regarding such houses.

General Mulcahy

Do I understand that there are powers that the Minister for Local Government has at present in such matters that he is not exercising?

Dr. Ward

Could the Minister indicate how he proposes to provide houses for the class I referred to, small farmers and uneconomic holders, who cannot avail of the subsidy, inasmuch as they have no credit, and to whom loans are no use, as the subsidy is not sufficient to enable them to build. How is that particular rural housing problem to be solved?

General Mulcahy

That is a problem on which I would be glad to hear any suggestions the Deputy might have to offer?

Mr. Anthony

In the course of my comments on this Vote this evening I asked a few questions. The Minister was not in the House at the time, but the Minister for Justice took his place and must have handed him some notes. Among the questions I asked was one as to what authority borough councils or corporations had to remit rates in cases where the Government have given grants for building purposes. I asked that for a very specific reason, which I mentioned. I also asked the reason for rejecting the lowest tender for a contract for a housing scheme in Cork city. For some reason quite obscure to the citizens of Cork the lowest tender was turned down and new advertisements issued.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is going further than asking a question.

Mr. Anthony

That is the question I want to have answered, because I know the Minister has the happy knack of getting out of a difficulty by saying that he does not understand the matter. I am explaining the position in my best English. I want to know why it was that for a contract for housing in the city of Cork the lowest tender was not accepted by his Department, why it was the whole scheme was altered and new advertisements issued, and the contract given to another contractor, who is a local man. Why was it taken, in the interests of fair play, from the British Housing Corporation, who were the original contractors, submitted the lowest tender, and gave satisfaction in all previous contracts?

General Mulcahy

How does the Deputy know? If the Deputy puts down a question I will answer it within reasonable limits.

Mr. Anthony

That is the easiest way to evade it.

General Mulcahy

If the Deputy really wants information I will give him a chance of getting it.

Mr. Anthony

The Minister gets so many chances. Let him play the game.

An Ceann Comhairle

Look at all the chances the Deputy is getting.

Mr. Anthony

The Minister is in a hole and cannot get out of it.

General Mulcahy

If it is a question I cannot reasonably answer I am quite prepared not to answer it, but I would not like to say why I refuse to answer it until I get a chance of seeing what the answer to the question is.

Mr. Anthony

I will ask another question. Is it a fact that the person who eventually got the contract is a subscriber to Cumann na nGaedheal?

General Mulcahy

There are so many subscribers to the Cumann na nGaedheal Fund that I cannot keep track of all of them.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Walsh to conclude the questions.

Mr. Hogan

I want to ask a question.

Mr. Walsh

Would the Minister state what is the cause of the change in the procedure in the giving of grants to applicants under the Housing Act? Heretofore it was the practice of his Department to give the money in instalments as the building progressed, but of late his Department has refused to give any of the money until an engineering inspector gives his final certificate.

General Mulcahy

When the grant to private persons is reduced to £25 the Statute provides that it be paid in one lump sum. Since then the grant has only been paid after the completion of the houses and in one sum.

Mr. Walsh

When will the motion standing in the name of Deputy Ruttledge and myself be discussed?

An Ceann Comhairle

That question should be addressed to the President.

General Mulcahy

I think I remember the President replying to Deputy Ruttledge and saying that it would be discussed when the Estimates are finished.

Mr. O'Kelly

There appears to be some discrepancy in certain figures.

Mr. Hogan

(Clare) rose.

An Ceann Comhairle

There have been thirty speeches, apart from the Minister's concluding speech, on this Estimate, and there have been a number of questions. Questions are asked entirely through the indulgence of the Chair, at the end of the concluding speech, and we must not have a second debate. I was intending to conclude the questions with Deputy Walsh, on the basis that two members of the Labour Party and three members of Fianna Fáil Party had asked questions. I will allow Deputy Hogan to ask a question, and then Deputy O'Kelly can ask his question on figures without comment.

Mr. Hogan

I think it is my right to ask a question.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy has no such right. The position is that the Minister speaks, to conclude the debate, and when he has spoken it is quite clear that the debate ought normally to be concluded, but a practice has grown up that a certain number of questions are allowed by the Chair. But the right to ask questions cannot be insisted on. It is identical with the case of supplementary questions. The Chair has the right to decide when questions in a case like this should conclude.

Mr. Hogan

Since the Minister has run away from the entire question of housing, I would like to know if he would tell us whether he has any information in his Department as to the number of insanitary houses in unurbanised towns in the Irish Free State, and if he has any provision in his mind for dealing with these insanitary houses.

General Mulcahy

I would not be prepared to say right off that we have complete information in regard to housing requirements. Probably we have a fairly considerable amount of information on the matter. The discussion of what we might suggest in connection with insanitary houses, as far as I am concerned, will have to be left over until we are dealing with housing proposals.

In reply to Deputy O'Kelly, the discrepancies that he appears to find between last year's figures and this year's figures are explained if he will recollect that there were supplementary estimates during the year.

Question put: "That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration."

The Committee divided: Tá, 51; Níl, 77.

Tá

• Aiken, Frank.
• Allen, Denis.
• Anthony, Richard.
• Blaney, Neal.
• Boland, Gerald.
• Boland, Patrick.
• Bourke, Daniel.
• Brady, Seán.
• Briscoe, Robert.
• Broderick, Henry.
• Buckley, Daniel.
• Carty, Frank.
• Cassidy, Archie J.
• Clery, Michael.
• Colbert, James.
• Corkery, Dan.
• Corish, Richard.
• Corry, Martin John.
• Crowley, Fred. Hugh.
• Crowley, Tadhg.
• Davin, William.
• Derrig, Thomas.
• De Valera, Eamon.
• Everett, James.
• Fahy, Frank.
• Flinn, Hugo.
• Geoghegan, James.
• Goulding, John.
• Hayes, Sean.
• Hogan, Patrick (Clare).
• Houlihan, Patrick.
• Jordan, Stephen.
• Kennedy, Michael Joseph.
• Killilea, Mark.
• Lemass, Seán F.
• Little, Patrick John.
• Maguire, Ben.
• MacEntee, Seán.
• Moore, Séamus.
• Morrissey, Daniel.
• Murphy, Timothy Joseph.
• O'Dowd, Patrick Joseph.
• O'Kelly, Seán T.
• O'Reilly, Matthew.
• Ryan, James.
• Sexton, Martin.
• Sheehy, Timothy (Tipp.).
• Smith, Patrick.
• Tubridy, John.
• Walsh, Richard.
• Ward, Francis C.

Níl

• Aird, William P.
• Alton, Ernest Henry.
• Beckett, James Walter.
• Bennett, George Cecil.
• Blythe, Ernest.
• Bourke, Séamus A.
• Brennan, Michael.
• Brodrick, Seán.
• Byrne, John Joseph.
• Carey, Edmund.
• Coburn, James.
• Cole, John James.
• Collins-O'Driscoll, Mrs. Margt.
• Conlon, Martin.
• Connolly, Michael P.
• Cosgrave, William T.
• Craig, Sir James.
• Daly, John.
• Davis, Michael.
• Doherty, Eugene.
• Dolan, James N.
• Doyle, Peadar Seán.
• Duggan, Edmund John.
• Dwyer, James.
• Egan, Barry M.
• Esmonde, Osmond Thos. Grattan.
• Finlay, Thomas A.
• Fitzgerald, Desmond.
• Fitzgerald-Kenney, James.
• Good, John.
• Gorey, Denis J.
• Haslett, Alexander.
• Hassett, John J.
• Hennessy, Michael Joseph.
• Hennessy, Thomas.
• Hennigan, John.
• Henry, Mark.
• Hogan, Patrick (Galway).
• Holohan, Richard.
• Jordan, Michael.
• Keogh, Myles.
• Law, Hugh Alexander.
• Leonard, Patrick.
• Lynch, Finian.
• Mathews, Arthur Patrick.
• McDonogh, Martin.
• McFadden, Michael Og.
• McGilligan, Patrick.
• Mongan, Joseph W.
• Mulcahy, Richard.
• Murphy, James E.
• Murphy, Joseph Xavier.
• Myles, James Sproule.
• Nally, Martin Michael.
• Nolan, John Thomas.
• O'Connell, Richard.
• O'Connor, Bartholomew.
• O'Hanlon, John F.
• O'Higgins, Thomas.
• O'Leary, Daniel.
• O'Mahony, The.
• O'Reilly, John J.
• O'Sullivan, Gearóid.
• O'Sullivan, John Marcus.
• Redmond, William Archer.
• Reynolds, Patrick.
• Rice, Vincent.
• Roddy, Martin.
• Shaw, Patrick W.
• Sheehy, Timothy (West Cork).
• Thrift, William Edward.
• Tierney, Michael.
• Vaughan, Daniel.
• White, John.
• White, Vincent Joseph.
• Wolfe, George.
• Wolfe, Jasper Travers.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Cassidy and G. Boland; Níl, Deputies Duggan and P.S. Doyle.

Motion declared lost.

Vote put and declared carried.