Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 20 Apr 1934

Vol. 51 No. 16

Vote 10—Office of Public Works.

Mr. MacEntee

I move:—

Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £66,720 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníochtha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1935, chun Tuarastail agus Costaisí Oifig na nOibreacha Puiblí. (1 agus 2 Will, 4, c. 33; a. 5 agus 6; 5 agus 6 Vict., c. 89. a. 1 agus 2; 9 agus 10 Vict., c. 86, a. 2, 7 agus 9; etc.)

That a sum not exceeding £66,720 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1935, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of Public Works. (1 and 2 Will. 4, c. 33, ss. 5 and 6; 5 and 6 Vict., c. 89, ss. 1 and 2; 9 and 10 Vict., c. 86, ss. 2, 7 and 9; etc.)

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance (Mr. Hugo Flinn)

The only important variations are under sub-head A—Salaries, Wages and Allowances—and sub-head F—Appropriations-in-Aid. Sub-head A shows an increase of £4,517 due to the staff for the administration of minor relief schemes being shown on this Vote for the first time. The staff number 35 and the provision for their pay is £7,165. In 1933-34 the Minor Relief Schemes staff were paid out of Vote 69 for relief schemes. The significance of that was that the whole of the relief cost of administration relief was taken out of the Relief Vote to a greater extent than now. Sub-head F—Appropriations-in-Aid—shows an increase of £1,050 due to an anticipated increase in the amount to be realised on salaries and expenses of the engineering staff to be recovered as part of the cost of arterial drainage schemes and, also, the larger yield in penal interest on overdue repayment of loans.

In Vote 11, there is an increase of £3,000 mainly due to provision for the purchase of sites for volunteer instructional halls and to anticipated increase in demands for new buildings for the Gárda Síochána. Item (b) new works, alterations and additions shows an increase of £125,935. This is mainly due to the provision of £50,000 for volunteer instructional halls and £62,000 for other works for the Department of Defence and to an increase of £30,000 in grants for building of national schools. There is also an increase of £9,000 in the provision for Gárda Síochána barracks; a provision of £10,000 for new headquarters for the Department of Industry and Commerce and a provision of £10,000 for a central garage in Dublin for the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. Under sub-head C—Maintenance and Supplies— there is a decrease of £2,812 due to casual variations on a large number of items. Under sub-head F—Fuel, Light, Water and Cleaning—there is an increase of £2,500 mainly due to the substitution of turf for coal, and additional accommodation in connection with the Unemployment Assistance Act and the Revenue Department. Sub-head J (2)—Arterial Drainage—there is an increase of £11,000 in connection with expected increase of expenditure on the various drainage districts in which work is proceeding, or on which it is about to begin, especially the River Erne Drainage District. In connection with the Barrow Drainage sub-head J (3) there is a decrease of £36,652 due to the approaching completion of the works. The Barrow Drainage Scheme will be completed in a couple of weeks.

Mr. Minch

In a couple of weeks?

Mr. Flinn

There is always a little work going on. Under sub-head J (4)— Arterial Drainage—there is an increase of £5,990 which is due to the purchase of part of the machinery being used on the Barrow scheme which we can bring into the ordinary arterial drainage system. There is an increase of £750 under sub-head J (5) due to the maintenance of additional machinery. Sub-head L—Appropriations-in-Aid— shows a decrease of £4,071, which is due to expected diminution in grazing and other lettings and an expected decrease in the hire of dredgers and other plant.

Mr. Dockrell

I wish to refer to a couple of items in this Vote. In Vote 10 I notice under Sub-head A the reference "National Monuments Act inspector, clerical officer and bonus." Now as far as the duties discharged by that officer go I have nothing but praise. But I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary where, in the accounts, does the maintenance work carried out by his orders appear. I do not see the item for them. I know there are works carried out from time to time of a very necessary character such as the replacing of stones, the cutting down of trees that may be overhanging monuments, the cutting of grass, etc. I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary what is the amount expended under that head. While on the question of ancient monuments, I do not know what the Government consider can be spent on ancient monuments, but, certainly, such expenditure is very reproductive both from an antiquarian point of view and from the point of view of tourist traffic. For instance, people go out to see excavations made in Palestine. I have no doubt if the Parliamentary Secretary used his ingenuity almost equally interesting remains could be found by digging in some of the old antiquarian grounds in this country. I do not suggest, of course, that that can be pursued beyond a certain point.

While we are on that question I should like to refer to two places in this country—Ballymote Castle, Co. Sligo, and Swords Castle in Co. Dublin. I understand that there is a list of buildings which have been scheduled to be taken over by the Board of Works, but which have not yet been taken over. Of course some of them possibly may not be worth while taking over. At the same time, the sooner the best of them are taken over and kept in proper repair the better. Possibly some excavations in connection with these buildings might be considered. I certainly have no sympathy with the spending of money on absolutely unproductive schemes when there are things waiting at our hands on which money can be expended and from which this country would reap a benefit by way of enriching its antiquarian possessions and by increasing the volume of tourist traffic. Many tourists would come to see these ancient remains. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary in his reply will be able to deal with Government policy as regards the very best of these antiquarian remains. There is no doubt that a certain number of the minor buildings are disappearing like snow from a ditch. Possibly the Government may say that they are not worth the cost of preserving them.

I now pass on to Vote 11, where under the heading of "Ministry of Industry and Commerce," there is a sum provided for a building in Ship Street. Only £10,000 is to be expended this year, but the ultimate cost of that building is to be £100,000. The item is given as "Ship Street building— hot water supply for lavatories, etc." One could erect a very excellent building for £100,000. I think I know Ship Street fairly well and I can say that you certainly cannot erect that building on the frontage. I wonder is the Parliamentary Secretary going to erect it in what used to be the barrack yard of Ship Street barracks? It occurs to me that the Government are rather prone, in erecting a number of buildings, to think that the particular building they are putting up is the last they are going to erect. They merely shove it on some site in which it will fit in with the existing buildings. I consider that if the Government would plan some distance ahead and if more money were expended on the lay-out of the building and less on the actual construction, they would get an equal return for the money in the building itself and at the same time they would be steadily improving the lay-out of the city. There is no doubt that the Castle is a big difficulty in Dublin's traffic problem. I think it would be a great mistake if the Government were to erect a building costing £100,000 in a haphazard way without any consideration of the traffic problem. Of course, only £10,000 is being expended this year, but there will be an ultimate expenditure of £100,000.

I should like to suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that, first of all, he might mention the precise location of this building and, secondly, he might consider whether anything could be done in connection with its erection that would help to ease the problem of the traffic which at present meanders around the Castle. I am somewhat nervous about this because my suspicions were aroused when asking a question about College Green Post Office the other day. Having regard to the answer I got, I think the Post Office authorities are not very sure whether they are going to move into a building at the corner of St. Andrew Street and Trinity Street. The reason I mention the matter again is that it seems to me that a post office should be a highly specialised building. I cannot conceive that you could put up a block of office buildings and then just blow in and take possession of a certain section of them for the purposes of a post office. I see Deputy Alderman Tom Kelly looking at me. Possibly he recalls the discussion the other day as to whether Trinity Street was paved with wood or concrete. The Government are immune from the necessity of having their plans passed by the Corporation. Having regard to that fact, they should be all the more careful to see that their plans do not outrage the spirit, at any rate, of the Town Planning Bill which has just been passed.

In the same way I would suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary, perhaps in a lesser degree, that a comprehensive well-thought-out scheme should be formulated in respect to a number of those buildings in the vicinity of the Castle, quite apart from the major buildings, and that regard should be had to the appearance of the buildings and the needs of the traffic.

I suggest that the Government might very well set a headline for the rest of the city in considering the lay-out of their buildings. I have no fault to find generally with the way in which Government buildings are erected. They are usually of a style worthy of this city. At the same time, their appearance is enormously enhanced when they are in a thoroughfare that is capable of taking the traffic around them. In that connection, I do not wish to stress a matter of which I am sure the Government are very well aware, that in this class of work reproductive employment will be given to a class of worker who most requires employment at the present time, namely, the unskilled labourer. I just want to put these few questions to the Parliamentary Secretary, and hope that he will answer them fully. I would ask him to remember that I can have another shot at him on these Estimates next year, because I am sure it is not the intention to spend the whole of this £100,000 this year.

I suggest that he should take the provisions of the Town Planning Bill to heart, and while making a proper building, which I have no doubt he will, he should consider the traffic problem at the same time.

Mr. Davin

The Parliamentary Secretary, in explaining the reduction under Sub-head J 3, stated for the first time in my hearing that the work of the main drainage of the river Barrow would be completed within the next couple of months. I have made repeated representations to the Board of Works as to the necessity for carrying out even preliminary work on some of the tributaries. The Parliamentary Secretary, in a recent reply, stated that this work in one particular case, that of the Douglas river, would not be undertaken until the main work had been completed. If the main work is to be completed inside the next couple of months, and if the Parliamentary Secretary had that knowledge at the beginning of the financial year, I would like to know from him why he did not make provision in the Estimates this year for carrying out drainage work on the tributaries, such as the Douglas river and on other rivers about which I understand representations were made to him and his Department.

I do not regard it as part of my duty to go and inspect all these rivers, but I was pressed to inspect the Douglas river. It was quite evident to me as a layman that a good deal of preliminary work could be carried out there. In view of the amount of unemployment that still exists in that area I would be glad if the Parliamentary Secretary would look into this matter with a view to seeing whether, before the end of this financial year, preliminary work could not be started there. There are other cases in which work of the same kind requires to be done. I would press on the Parliamentary Secretary to consider the question, and if necessary to bring in a Supplementary Estimate so that a start may be made on this work and, if possible, have it completed before the end of the present financial year.

I do not suppose the Parliamentary Secretary has personal responsibility for the stamping of the cards of the people who are now and have been losing their employment on this class of work. It is a very important matter for them. If the Parliamentary Secretary can deal with the matter, or if he has been dealing with it, I would be glad to hear from him what progress has been made, and whether it is the intention in the future to stamp the cards of those who may be employed in the future on arterial drainage. I would be glad, too, to hear from him if he is personally satisfied that he has all the clerical and engineering staff at his disposal necessary to enable him to carry out and complete minor relief works. I made representations in writing to the Department to the effect that many minor relief works for which grants have been allocated during the past couple of years have not yet been completed. Failure to complete those works is, to my own personal knowledge, due to the fact that a sufficient amount of money has not been allocated. I have been wondering whether complaints of that kind have been investigated, and if the Parliamentary Secretary has at his disposal the necessary staff to enable an inspection to be made of works which are alleged to have been only partially completed; also whether he has reports in his Department as to the extent to which such allegations are correct or incorrect.

I believe it is the intention of the Parliamentary Secretary and of the Minister responsible for the next Vote which may be presented to the House for the carrying out of minor relief works to allocate from that Vote whatever sum of money may be required to complete these works in a satisfactory manner. Personally, I am very glad that the Parliamentary Secretary himself has gone around the country and made an inspection of some of these works. I believe he made an inspection of very many of them. I think it is a very good thing that the man in charge of a Department responsible for the carrying out of such works should make a personal visit to them because it is bound to have a good effect on all those employed on the works, as well as those who may be directly responsible on the spot for their supervision. I hope, if he is in a position to make further visits, he will inspect some of the tributaries to the Barrow about which representations have been made to him. I feel, if he does so, that he will be able to satisfy himself that there is an urgent reason as to why such work should be undertaken at once, particularly in view of the fact that the main drainage work on the Barrow is about to come to an end.

Although I am not a Deputy for the County Dublin I live in the county and have been approached repeatedly during the last 12 months or so regarding the method of recruiting men for work under the control of the Board of Works in Dun Laoghaire and district. I have spoken to Deputies representing the County Dublin on the matter. I never like interfering in the affairs of another constituency without consulting some of the Deputies of that area. I suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that it is very desirable, in the case of additional vacancies that may arise in his Department, that men who have had temporary service extending over a number of years should get first preference when employment of a permanent nature offers. That has been the practice, I think, in the past. I think it would save the Parliamentary Secretary and the officials of his Department a good deal of trouble if a recognised procedure of that kind were adopted. It would prevent people from complaining that appointments made to vacancies that arise are made on the grounds of political affiliations.

I have been approached, and other Deputies were approached last night, in regard to a decision of the Department that apparently was hurriedly arrived at to withdraw from commission one of the dredgers. I know that representations have been made to the Board of Works for the dredging of certain harbours and I was certainly very surprised to learn of this decision. The result is that the captain of one of the dredgers who left the merchant service in which he had a pretty good job got one week's notice terminating his employment by the Board of Works as well as six other employees who, I believe, are all married men with dependents. It was put to me that single men should be dismissed in preference to married men. Personally I do not share that view. I believe that it is service whether it be under the Board of Works or any other public body, that should be the consideration upon which men should be removed from their positions, if it is found necessary to dispense with the services of anybody. I have been informed that there is still work available for the employment of this dredger which has been withdrawn. Therefore, I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will look into the matter so that this dredger may be continued in use for carrying out whatever work can be usefully done during the coming year, and so that all the staff may be maintained in employment if it is at all possible to do so. It is very unfortunate that a decision of this kind should result in the dismissal of seven or eight men, some of whom are married and have dependents. If there is any useful work to be done by the dredger, I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will reconsider the matter, and retain the services of these men, even in a temporary capacity, who are threatened with dismissal, I understand, in the course of the next few days.

I do not want to go into other matters affected by this Estimate. This Department has the spending of huge sums of money. I am glad to be able to acknowledge where relief schemes were carried out in my area the work has been done in a satisfactory manner. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will be able to persuade the Minister for Finance and the Government to provide the further large additional sums that are necessary, in my constituency, in order to carry out work about which representations have been made to the Department.

Mr. T. Kelly

I hope the Parliamentary Secretary's heart is closed against sympathy, because I got any amount of sympathy from Ministers during the last 12 months, but very little else. One Minister gave his blessing to the proposal I am bringing before the House. I am trying to get in early in this discussion to see if I can get support from other Deputies. Some time ago I got a resolution passed by the Dublin Corporation directing the attention of the Government to the present unhappy position of the hackney trade. The resolution was adopted, after vigorous discussion, in which members who opposed the motion consisted of those who are in possession of motor cars. I hope Deputies who are listening and who have motor cars will dismiss that aspect of it from their minds. A copy of the resolution was sent to Ministers, one of whom expressed great sympathy. I hoped, as a result of that sympathy, that something was going to be done, but unfortunately a letter from his Department later disclosed the fact that he did not think he could usefully interfere in the matter. When I discussed the position recently with the Attorney-General he put a practical proposal into my mind. That is where I am asking the Parliamentary Secretary to help. The hackney car and the cab trade is fast diminishing in Dublin, and only a couple of hundred men are engaged in it at present. For generations, these people have been plying their calling on the streets of Dublin. It is a pity to think that the trade should become extinct, apart from practical and sentimental reasons. I want to have some practical work done now. It is hardly necessary to point out what a useful trade the hackney trade is. It helps other industries which are now very badly hit to keep going.

The suggestion made to me by the Attorney-General was to follow the example set by Mr. Vincent, who was, until recently, a member of the Seanad, and who very generously recently made a splendid gift of his estate to this country. Mr. Vincent protected the hackney car trade in the Killarney district by reserving the park exclusively for horse-drawn vehicles. My suggestion to the Parliamentary Secretary is that he should make a similar order with regard to the Phoenix Park. I hope that will not take away the breath of Deputies who own motor cars. If the Phoenix Park was reserved during the late spring, the summer and the autumn months to pedestrians on shanks' mare and to hackney owners it would help. Anyone who wants to see the beauties of the Phoenix Park, the like of which can be seen nowhere else, should see it from a hackney car. The beauties of the Park cannot be seen if people flash through it in a tin box. From the practical point of view, I should point out that the men engaged in the hackney trade are earning very little money. Anybody can see that by looking at their equipages. There is no way of helping these men unless the Government comes to their assistance.

I do not think I am asking too much when I suggest that this privilege should be given to the hackney trade during certain months of the year, when citizens and tourists visit the Phoenix Park. I see members looking at me—some of them, I hope, sympathetically. The Parliamentary Secretary is an unknown quantity in this matter. As there is no tariff on sympathy from the Ministers it comes along in shiploads. I do not want sympathy from the Parliamentary Secretary. I would like to get something else. If the Government will not do something for this trade the men engaged in it, as well as their families, will soon be getting home help and will be no use to the community. Surely it would be better to help them to make a living in the way I suggest, even though it is not an ideal way. If any other method suggests itself to Deputies I hope they will put it forward. This trade was responsible for carriage building in the city and for all classes of saddlery. Those engaged in it purchased considerable quantities of agricultural produce, and helped many other trades. All these industries have been badly hit by motor-cars. I do not want to go back too far, but I remember the appearance of the first motor vehicle in Dublin, about 1885 or 1886. The first car was exhibited in Molesworth Street and was driven by a man named Gillies, who was manager of the Freeman's Journal, when that newspaper was a great journal, and was in the possession of the late Mr. Edmund Dwyer Gray. Mr. Gillies was the first man to drive a motor vehicle up and down Molesworth Street. It was a rather peculiar-looking vehicle at the time, and attracted a great deal of attention. There was a cab and car stand outside Leinster House at the time, and naturally the jarveys were very interested as the motor-car proceeded through the streets. I remember their remarks, because some of them impressed themselves rather vividly in my mind. I would repeat some of them only that I would scandalise Deputies. The older jarveys looked upon the new vehicle with a certain amount of foreboding, because we know that coming events cast their shadows before them, while the younger men more or less heaped ridicule upon it. In a few years it was an unfortunate invention from their point of view. I submit to the Parliamentary Secretary, with his practical mind, that in this way he might help those now engaged in the hackney trade. I am certain he has an amount of sympathy with the present position the jarveys are in. A little practical help in the way I have indicated would materially benefit a number of decent citizens and their families.

Mr. Brodrick

I agree with what Deputy Davin says regarding the Parliamentary Secretary. He was, apparently, very active throughout the country in seeing that the works—particularly minor relief schemes—were being carried out, but I do not agree with some of the things that were tried out under these schemes. I see under the heading of "Gárda Síochana Barracks" a great number of re-votes in connection with the amounts allotted last year. I should like to know whether these refer to contracts that were not completed or whether part payments were made on particular contracts. I see an item representing a re-vote for a new barrack at Ballinasloe, for which an estimate has not yet been made. I should like to know from the Parliamentary Secretary whether it is intended to erect that barrack in the year 1934-35. When we come to the item "Turloughmore ex-R.I.C. Barrack—Restoration," we find that nothing is allowed in the Estimates. A fair amount has been done as regards the erection of Gárda barracks throughout the country, but in this area the Guards were housed in a very bad thatched house, the floor level being far below the level of the adjoining road. Fortunately for the Guards they were changed from that barrack. That district is now being patrolled from another barrack about six miles away. A fine old stone building, which served as an R.I.C. barrack, is now in a state of disuse. That barrack should be reopened and the force brought back to that district, because it is almost impossible for Guards to patrol an area of ten miles day and night.

Under the heading of "National Schools" the Vote this year is for £120,000, whereas last year it was for £90,000. I am pleased to see the increase in this Vote, because the condition of a number of national schools is a scandal. Some of them are really a disgrace. No attention has been given them for years and no attempt has been made to put them in any state of repair. A great number of them should be pulled down and new schools built. Some of them are one-storey buildings, 7' 6" or 7' high, with mounds of earth practically up to the window-sills and very poor playgrounds. In my own parish, the manager and the people have been applying for a school for years. I gave the name of the school to the Parliamentary Secretary—Coldwood, in the parish of Athenry. The officials of the Board of Works practically believed that the school would be in course of erection last month. Now it seems to be as far away as ever. There are photographs of that school in the office of the Parliamentary Secretary. The school is about 30' long and 7' high. It has a very poor floor, with a mound of earth at the back of the building as high as the window-sills. I know the school well and it is a disgrace. Other schools are in the same condition. In Recess, where sand has been drawn for some years, the school is in the very same state. I hope that, with the increase in the Vote, a move in this matter will be made at once, because it is a great hardship on youngsters in those areas to have to travel on foot in winter time up to three or four miles and then to remain in such hovels.

I notice that the provision for depôts for kelp, carrageen and rural industries was £2,500 for 1934 and that the total Estimate is now £3,500. For the central marketing depôt there is an increase of £100 this year. On looking at the Gaeltacht Services Estimate, I find that the Vote for kelp, carrageen and rural industries has been reduced by thousands of pounds. While the Vote for the depôts has increased from £2,500 to £3,500 and while the Vote for the marketing depôts has increased by £100, under Gaeltacht Services the Estimate for carrageen development has been reduced from £11,250 to £5,350. The Vote for kelp development has been reduced from £30,300 to £12,850. There is also a reduction in respect of rural industries. We see, therefore, that while the Vote for the central depôt at Beggar's Bush and the other depôts has increased, the Vote for these industries under Gaeltacht Services has been reduced. I think that that requires some explanation from the Parliamentary Secretary.

I notice that there is an item in this Estimate for the provision of instruction halls for the Volunteer force but that there is a note stating that the estimate of cost has not yet been made. When the Volunteer force was started, a promise was made that the halls would be erected this year. Officers of this force are going around some parts of the country with tapes measuring the sites. Some of them have plans in their pockets and it was understood that the halls would be erected at once. It seems most unfair that officers of this force should be leading the people to believe that they are to get parochial halls for instructional purposes in the different areas when no money is provided here for the purpose.

With regard to Athenry Agricultural Station and the resurfacing of the yard there, I would like to know if that was done under contract or direct labour and, if so, the cost per yard. It is quite easy to find out the number of square yards done. I would like information as to whether that was done by the ordinary farm workers, who are supposed to be employed there for work on the farm, whether it was carried out by students, who go there to learn agricultural work, or whether it was done by contract or by labour taken in, the ordinary unemployed. If it was done by the agricultural labourer it is most unfair, because they should be employed for agricultural work only. I do not know whether the students had anything to do with it. The Parliamentary Secretary might let us know who did the work and how much it cost.

I would like to know the cost involved in the change over from coal to turf in Government Buildings, the charge for changing the particular form of grates that suited coal. Were those grates suitable for the use of turf? What was the effect of the change from the point of view of the amount of turf used and the employment given in the cutting and saving and transport of the turf?

With regard to arterial drainage, under the 1924 Act the Board of Works carried out certain schemes and I know that at the time I was very keen on the subject because it benefited a great lot of the land in the country. As well as I remember the Government gave a grant of 20 per cent. and it was optional with the county councils to give a grant. In Galway they gave a 20 per cent. grant. The amount expended had to be repaid in a period of 15 years. That is very heavy on the Galway people. Would it be possible to have legislation introduced to put them on the same basis as labourers who are allowed 35 years for repayment and the Government could give a grant up to 50 per cent. and the local authorities could be compelled to give a grant also in order to make the scheme economic for the landholders? There was some hardship under the first Act. The Government gave only 20 or 25 per cent. and it was optional on the local authorities to give a grant. The landholders had to bear 60 or 75 per cent. of the cost of the drainage and had to repay the grants in 15 years. At that time 2 per cent. was estimated for maintenance. That work was done in 1925 and 1926 and every ratepayer whose land was benefited is now being applied to for a drainage maintenance rate. In every one of these cases a weed has not been disturbed in the rivers, at least in County Galway, since they were handed over to the county council by the Board of Works. I would like the Parliamentary Secretary to inquire why people are being applied to for a maintenance rate when the work is not being carried out. They have not done a tap of work on the rivers for three years and now they are demanding a heavy maintenance rate. The people will pay for the maintenance if it is being done, but the fact is that these rivers are in practically as bad a condition as when the Board of Works started the work in 1925.

We are told that the Barrow scheme is practically finished. We have an equally important work to be done in Galway, the Corrib drainage. For years it has been before the Government and the people. We have been told that it would be an uneconomic scheme. There is a fair amount of poor land alongside it, but there is a large amount of good land there also. As long as the Corrib drainage is neglected, drainage work will be held up in the north-east portion of the county, from Glenamaddy, from Milltown, and from Cong to Galway. Any work that is done on the rivers there floods the land along the Corrib. The Parliamentary Secretary might find an opportunity of using the unemployment assistance money on useful work there. The Unemployment Assistance Act has been condemned by his own Party in Connemara, where they think it will demoralise the people and lead to idleness. Work on the drainage of the Corrib might be made economic if they expended that money there on employment instead of distributing it and getting no return. That sort of thing has been condemned by his own Party in the West. Only three or four years ago miles of the countryside were flooded around the Corrib and important drainage work is being held up in the north-east corner of the county.

I would like to bring to the notice of the Parliamentary Secretary the way drainage is being done under the 1926 Act, which gave power to the Government to give 50 per cent. of the total cost and the local authority from 20 to 25 per cent. in order to make schemes economic for the landholders. I would like him to send inspectors down or go to the district himself. I know he took a great interest in the relief schemes last winter, and probably during the summer he might have a look over the drainage works that have been carried out at great expense to the landholders. I agree, of course, that some good work has been done. I would like him to see that when the rivers have been handed over to the county councils they are kept in an ordinary state of repair. I believe if that is done the people will have no objection to pay for the maintenance.

We saw quite recently where big amounts were about to be expended on the opening of bogs. As regards minor relief schemes, there is always a habit of rushing things from Christmas to March and probably sufficient time is not given to the consideration of schemes and the best way to carry them out. A fair amount of work has been done in the way of opening up bogs in the West, but I think that if a little more care were expended the work would be doubly useful. Work has been rushed along without any particular plan; they drive a road into a bog in one area and another into a bog in another area. Where we have hundreds of acres of bog in the hands of the Land Commission, if that scheme could be adopted, a regular net-work of roads could be made through these areas. I know that on some occasions on which that was done very good prices were got for the bog. A few years ago when the Land Commission made a net-work of roads into the bogs, in some cases they were able by selling the turbary to recoup themselves for the amount of money expended on the making of the roads besides having given so much labour in their making.

I do not know whether a big sum of money is to be expended in the opening of bogs and I do not know whether that would come under the Board of Works or under the Land Commission. If the Board of Works are to be responsible for it I would like when they are about to expend the money to be very careful. If it is proposed to work those bogs any sort of a big scheme means a big initial expenditure in order to plan out a good system of roads by which the turf is to be made an economic scheme. In the making of the turf an economic proposition as fuel, transport will play a big part. But the ordinary little minor works will be of very little use in such schemes.

I am also glad to see that the Government are opening up those big stretches of bog in the Gaeltacht and in Connemara particularly. There are very fine openings in these places. If turf is going to become a popular fuel it is only in this way it will become so. Last year, the Government spent all their time and their energies in connection with turf in areas where the farmers have as much turbary as would last themselves for 30 or 40 years. People in such cases are not going to cut and sell turf at 11/6 a ton and thus run their bogs out in 15 or 20 years. The proper scheme would be to start operations on large bogs around which there is not a big population. In that way, you would have a big scheme to operate. There would be means whereby men could be brought in and in the summer months they could be housed in canvas huts and put under a wage. There is an opening for such operations. If turf is to be made popular as a fuel this is the only way in which the matter can be handled. It is quite certain that small farmers down the country who have sufficient turbary for 30 or 40 years are not going to the trouble of saving turf out of this limited turbary and selling it at 11/6 a ton.

On the question of the national monuments I would really like to know whether they are in the hands of the Board of Works and how many of them are directly in the hands of the county councils. I know that between them, whether they are in the hands of the Board of Works or the local authorities, very little attention is being paid to these monuments. Very little is expended on them by either the Board of Works or the local authorities. Were it not for local opinion I know of cases where those monuments in the hands of local authorities would suffer the fate of being taken down and the stones put into the stone crushers. I would like to have some information on that matter. In the near future is there any money to be spent on them in order to keep them in a proper state of repair? I would like if the Parliamentary Secretary would now give us some information on the matter.

Mr. Norton

The Board of Works is responsible for the maintenance and repairs of this building. I want to ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether it is possible for him to do anything to render the heating and the ventilation of this building—not merely the Dáil Chamber but the adjoining rooms —more satisfactory than they are. Deputies of all Parties complain that this House is hopelessly over-heated through the summer months and at the same time it is hopelessly under-ventilated. I would like the Parliamentary Secretary to say whether he could minimise in some way the overheating of the rooms and provide a remedy for that and for the bad state of the ventilation.

Reference has been made to the Barrow Drainage scheme. I think everybody who has seen the work carried out under the Barrow Drainage scheme will have nothing but praise for the excellent quality of that work. Everybody will appreciate the benefits that will accrue to the local people as a result of the work undertaken on the Barrow. I understand that the scheme is likely to be finished in May and that when finished approximately 600 to 700 people will be disemployed. A goodly number have been already paid off and the balance will be disemployed in May and June, on the termination of the scheme. That will mean the unemployment of close on 700 men. It will cause a serious problem in the areas where these men live and work.

I wonder if it would be possible for the Parliamentary Secretary to prolong employment on the Barrow scheme? This could be done by taking in hand the drainage of many tributaries of the Barrow. These are in need of drainage. It seems to me a great pity that the Board of Works organisation on the Barrow drainage should be dispersed while necessary drainage work remains to be done in the area. There are numbers of rivers in South Kildare which badly require to have something done on them. South Kildare is a good tillage area of the country. The neglect of the rivers there causes considerable flooding and does considerable damage to the farmers. I would like the Parliamentary Secretary to examine sympathetically the possibility of carrying out a supplementary drainage scheme on the Barrow so as to ensure that the drainage there would be thoroughly dealt with. If the drainage of these tributaries is tackled in the same efficient way that the drainage of the Barrow itself has been tackled, it will be possible for the farmers to complete the drainage of the land there in a very thorough manner.

I would like to know from the Parliamentary Secretary whether he can give us any indication as to the progress made in the erection of the new post office in Pearse Street. I understand that the preliminary work has commenced and that the Department intend to proceed further with the work. I am aware that there is only a token provision in the Estimate for that work this year. I would like the Parliamentary Secretary to give us some indication as to what progress it is likely to make so as to have the work completed in the present financial year.

There is also another work which is urgently in need of reconstruction and extension. That is the Thurles Post Office. I know that the post office staff find it very difficult to do their work there at present owing to the inadequate building. Perhaps the Secretary would take a note of this. There is another matter which concerns the activities of the Board of Works and that is in the matter of letting to contractors the works to be carried out. It seems to me that when the Board of Works makes up its mind to carry out a particular undertaking it should examine the possibility of having that work carried through by direct labour. I have seen cases of small grants being made available by the Board of Works for certain kinds of work, and these small grants being given to contractors to carry them out. I cannot see why the Board of Works itself, in respect of some of these contracts, could not employ a clerk of works and, with the assistance of their own professional and technical staff, carry out the work by direct labour. I feel sure that the work could be done at least as efficiently and, certainly, at less cost, through direct labour than by giving it out to a contractor. Carrying out such work by direct labour is the best method of ensuring that local labour will be employed.

Take the case of the Curragh Camp. A contract for a portion of certain work being done there has been given to a Cork firm. The Cork firm has brought painters from Cork to do the job. They have got some painters from Dublin also to do the work. While I do not begrudge to these men any work they get, I think that the local painters ought to get first consideration in such a case. They depend largely on the work they get from the Camp from time to time, but here you have the situation that about a dozen local painters are idle while painters from Cork and Dublin are being employed. I do not see why it is necessary to give the work of painting the Curragh Camp to a contractor, especially as the painting industry is one in which a master painter could be eliminated, and there can be no difficulty, on the part of the Board of Works, in having painting work carried out by direct labour. By doing so, they would make sure that local labour would get first preference in whatever employment was to be had. I feel sure that if the Board of Works got estimates on the matter and made comparisons as to the relative merits of work carried out by direct labour or under contract, they would find that it is advantageous, financially, to the State to have the work carried out by direct labour rather than by contract.

There is another matter to which I should like to refer, and that is the need for reconstructing the military barracks at Kildare. It is in a very neglected condition. I understand that, for some years past, the question of its reconstruction has been under consideration, but no such work is being carried out, although I think that the military authorities will admit that there is need, not only for its reconstruction, but also for adequate maintenance work in the barracks in order to prevent it from falling into a derelict condition. There is no provision for it in the Estimates this year, but I understand that the matter is under consideration by the Board of Works and that the Army authorities are anxious that some reconstruction work should be carried out on it. I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to expedite a decision on that matter, because I think that it is not only necessary to preserve the value of the buildings but I understand that the Army authorities think that it is necessary for military purposes.

There is a further matter to which I want to refer, that is, the derelict military barracks at Newbridge. I understand that the Parliamentary Secretary paid a visit to Newbridge recently and I am sure that he could not fail to be impressed, or rather depressed, with the hideous structure left in a derelict condition in the town. The building is there in ruins. It is insanitary. It is a dumping ground for refuse, and it is worse. The local town commissioners are pressing the Board of Works to continue the work of demolition and so remove the danger of an epidemic in the town. While small grants have been made for certain demolition work on the barracks, I think that the Parliamentary Secretary should make up his mind to demolish it completely, because it is a ruin and because it is unsightly. Even the demolition work might yield an income, because I understand that previous demolition work carried out there enabled some of the material to be sold and that that material brought in an income of, approximately, one-third of the cost of the demolition work that had been done. Having regard to that income, to the unsightly state of the building, and to its insanitary condition as well, I think the Parliamentary Secretary should do more than merely make an allocation of a couple of hundred pounds per annum for demolition work. Such a sum is inadequate. The building will have to come down in any case. It is a danger to the public. It is used as a playground by children, and when some of these children are killed, as they may be, by falling masonry, then everyone will wake up and say that the building will have to come down. I think that it should be demolished before such an accident happens, because, as I say, if such an accident does happen everyone will agree that the demolition was necessary, and everyone knows it should be done to-day.

In conclusion, I just want to pay a tribute to the minor relief works section of the Board of Works. I have had a good deal of correspondence with that Department and have sent many cases to it for examination and investigation. I want to say to the Parliamentary Secretary, while he is here, that not only did the matters I brought to the notice of that Department receive expeditious and sympathetic treatment, but I think it is only due to the officials of that Department, who are extremely hard pressed with work because of the number of minor relief schemes, to say that I appreciated very much the work they did and the sympathetic manner in which they dealt with all the representations I made to them.

Mr. Minch

While I should like to convey, through the Parliamentary Secretary, the appreciation of all the people who have benefited by the work of the Board of Works around Kildare, of the fine work done by the officials of that Department, I should like to say also that, although we know that the Barrow drainage is going to cease to function, it is a matter of great regret that the areas in which magnificent work has been done through the drainage of the Barrow and other such work should be allowed to drift back to the position in which they were formerly. The drainage work on these rivers has been done with great skill and has conferred a great benefit on the country around. I have been wondering if some central scheme of organisation, with some authority, could be arranged to look after the maintenance of this wonderful work when the Board of Works departs from that area. Otherwise, in the course of two or three years, the banks of these rivers will fall in and the rivers will become choked up again, and the fruits of that great effort will be lost. It will be money absolutely lost and thrown away.

Another matter to which I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to give his sympathetic consideration is the fact that Athy has been the lucky town in which the Board of Works established their headquarters for the Barrow drainage. It has been really an industry to Athy, which has no other industries, practically speaking. As the Board of Works are about to leave, would it not be possible to devise some scheme whereby their headquarters, or some quarters, could remain in Athy as a centre for engineering and general work elsewhere in the area? I do not know whether that could be considered as a feasible business proposition, but I think that a scheme could be put up that might be considered if the Board of Works or the Parliamentary Secretary would allow us to do so.

I have nothing more to say, except that the people of Athy, over and over again, have approached different public representatives to use their influence about having the headquarters there. In conclusion, I should like to refer to the matter which Deputy Norton brought up about Kildare and Newbridge, but since he has gone into that question I shall not detain the Parliamentary Secretary by going into it again.

Mr. Goulding

I, also, should like to refer to the question of maintenance, not alone in connection with drainage works, but also in connection with some of the other minor schemes, such as roads and so on. A lot of the work that has been done will be wasted if some effort is not made to maintain them. We have got a considerable number of by-roads in the past few years, and the work in connection with them has been done well, but I think we should bear in mind the old saying to the effect that what is everybody's business is nobody's business; and if it is supposed to be everybody's business to look after these works, it will only mean that nobody will look after them. The good work done and the money spent will be wasted in a comparatively few years unless some effort is made to maintain them. It is not the business of the Board of Works to maintain them, but perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary will give us some idea of what is intended to be done about their maintenance.

Last year I dealt with the question of a supply of lime. I should like to know what has been done in that direction. In the mountain areas people have asked me could anything be done to provide them with lime at an economic price. I know that in the majority of cases the limekilns are in the hands of private individuals. If some scheme could be arranged by which the agriculturist in the mountain areas would be supplied with lime at a figure somewhat under the price at present charged by the private owners of limekilns it would be a good way to grant relief. These people in the mountain areas are about the hardest working people we have. Their land is too poor to grow the things we want them to grow. They are too far from railway heads to be able to avail of the beet scheme, for instance. Their land is of such a nature that it requires constant attention and lime is the most important item in their agricultural economy. For a considerable number of years past these people have been deprived of that lime. If it would be possible to revive some of the old limekilns in these localities it would be one of the best ways in which we could spend money. It would be at least of permanent benefit. It would not be spending money on works which would be of no economic benefit.

I think it was Deputy Brodrick who referred to the hardship inflicted on some of those affected by drainage schemes. I should like to support him in that. Some of these people, who were, I may say, compelled to pay drainage maintenance rate, are now in a rather unfortunate position. For 15 years they are saddled with a heavy impost. Many of them declare that these schemes were carried out against their wishes and that they derive no benefit from them. If it would be possible to introduce legislation to afford these people some relief by extending the period of repayment it would be very desirable. No loss would be incurred. The people are anxious to pay, but they are unable to meet the heavy demand on them.

I should also like to know the position with regard to coastguard stations. Are they, like the old workhouses, falling into ruins and is it because the Department is asking too much for them? I understand that offers have been made for some of these stations but those who made the offers declare that the Board of Works are demanding an absolutely impossible rent. It would be better to accept a fair rent for these places than to let them fall down.

The minor relief schemes have been of great benefit. There is, however, one innovation that might be worth considering. In many places where unemployment is rife it might be possible when a work is likely to take a fair length of time to employ men for a certain period—one gang for a fortnight or three weeks and a different gang for another period of time. Men have come to me complaining that others have been favoured in the selection for employment and that they have been given no chance. If the suggestion I make could be adopted it would do away with a lot of complaints.

Mr. O'Leary

I agree with Deputy Goulding that the provision of lime in the poorer parts of the country would be of very great benefit. I should like to bring under the notice of the Parliamentary Secretary that in the Gaeltacht area west of Macroom Fianna Fáil supporters at the last election promised that lime would be provided at 1/- per barrel. So far that promise has not been carried out and I should like to bring it under the notice of the Parliamentary Secretary so that he might have the question gone into.

I should also like to bring under his notice the question of a small drainage scheme in Ballingeary in the County Cork. This scheme was examined three years ago and approved by the inspector. I would ask him to go into it now and see if the work could be carried out, as the summer time is the best period in which to do work of that kind. There is, I believe, a good deal of unemployment in the district. There was another drainage scheme carried out in the parish of Ballyvourney, at a place called Commnicluvan and I think the work is not quite satisfactory. A small further expenditure of £50 or so would make it a really good job. I would like the Parliamentary Secretary to have this scheme examined also.

Mr. Esmonde

In previous years, I have had occasion to ask the Parliamentary Secretary to look into the matter of derelict aerodromes throughout the country. I do not think that any decision has yet been arrived at on the matter. I notice that in the Estimates there is a considerable sum set aside for the rebuilding or reroofing of Baldonnell, but the other aerodromes which were left here by the British Government 12 years ago— Gormanstown, Collinstown, Fermoy and other places—are in a state of ruin, and I do not think any decision has been arrived at by the Government with regard to them. That is rather a long time to make up one's mind as to what is to be done. I would urge the Parliamentary Secretary to summon representatives of the Departments of Finance and Industry and Commerce to a consultation to decide whether these aerodromes are of any use and, if not, what should be done with them, because the delay entails a waste of public money, a certain amount of money having to be spent on their upkeep.

With regard to the white elephant we still have in the Phoenix Park—the Viceregal Lodge—there is, I think, a very considerable sum being paid every year in lieu of rates on this building. It appears in a different Vote from this. There is also a sum for maintenance put down and the whole thing comes to several thousand pounds a year. I have raised this matter on a previous occasion. There have been unofficial statements in the Irish Press to the effect that it was the intention of the Government to turn the Viceregal Lodge into some form of folk museum but they were unofficial and there has been no confirmation of the rumour. That is a matter in respect of which the Parliamentary Secretary might urge the other Departments concerned to make up their minds as to what is to be done with this expensive establishment. Apart from the house itself, which, I understand, is very expensive to keep up, there are extensive gardens. Who gets the benefit of these gardens, I do not know. Who eats the vegetables produced, I do not know, but I understand that when the British left, 12 years ago, they robbed a lot of valuable furniture from the various houses in the Phoenix Park and actually brought vans into the Phoenix Park in order to take away with them vegetables and rose-bushes which were really the property of the State. I do not imagine that that practice has been continued under our régime but who gets the benefits of the gardens there, I do not know.

Mr. Flinn

I did not quite catch what the Deputy said. Who does he say stole the furniture and vegetables?

Mr. Esmonde

The British.

General MacEoin

That is a new account you can send across.

Mr. Esmonde

I believe it was a common practice amongst British officials to steal furniture from the residences in the Phoenix Park previous to the establishment of the Irish Free State. There was a custom—I do not know whether it still exists— by which Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries are entitled to get one fat buck a year from the Phoenix Park. That practice was continued over a number of years. I do not know if it still goes on and if that fat buck is supplied each year to Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries. If the Minister and Parliamentary Secretaries do not get it, who does? I do not know to what extent Deputy Kelly's suggestion with regard to the Phoenix Park could be carried out as to the retention of the Park as a private preserve for horse-drawn vehicles. It certainly might be worth while for the Parliamentary Secretary to consult the Department of Industry and Commerce as to whether anything could be done in the way of helping out those people who are still engaged in the horse vehicle traffic.

The only other matter I must raise —and I have raised it every year for the last ten years—is the question of the amenities of Leinster House and the continued presence of this offensive caricature of the late Queen Victoria in front of the building. I have endeavoured, year after year, to raise the matter in what I thought was a rather jocular manner but, unfortunately, it still remains. The Ministry have repeatedly said that it was their wish that everything connected with our Parliamentary life which might be offensive to any section of the people should be removed in order that there might be no obstacles in the way of free acceptance of the authority of this House. Certainly the continued presence of this offensive monument is not conducive to the dignity of a national Parliament, or to acceptance of the idea that this Parliament fully represents the feelings of the public. In Belfast, where a very fine Parliament Buildings have been erected by the British Government, they have in front of them the statue of Lord Carson. I would very much prefer to have that statue here than the one we have at present, because in spite of his political opinions, Carson was a very sincere and patriotic Irishman. It is not conducive to respect for the Parliament that an offensive caricature on the lines of an Oriental idol should be preserved in front of the Parliament Buildings. I have raised this matter for ten years and I shall continue to raise it for the next ten years, if necessary, until such time as it is removed.

General MacEoin

I agree with Deputy Norton's suggestion to the Parliamentary Secretary that, where possible, the Office of Public Works should carry out renovations and repairs by direct labour. It is true that in places like the Curragh, Athlone and Galway, contracts might be given to people who are not resident in the area and people brought in from other districts and the local people who are in need of employment at present knocked out as a result. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to have that whole question of the painting and renovation of barracks all over the country reviewed with a view to having the work carried out by direct labour by the Office of Public Works. I would also be very glad, when they are doing that, if partisanship would not be shown. They have not done very much of it in the past, but at the same time, I have some complaints to make as to the manner in which minor relief schemes in the country have been carried out.

That complaint takes two forms. With regard to the schemes themselves, in many districts in the County of Longford minor relief schemes have been carried out which were not to the best advantage, and when I say not to the best advantage, I mean from the point of view of getting the best value for the money expended. In certain areas we have minor relief schemes carried out for prominent supporters of the present Administration, and the Office of Public Works and the Ministry of Finance generally, when recommendations were made in the past, maintained that a minor relief scheme should not be carried out that was going to benefit only one or two persons, but that it must be of advantage to at least nine or ten families. If that principle were maintained, it would be perfectly all right, because you could not get nine or ten families in an area who would all be of the same political opinion so that it would be perfectly non-Party, but in respect of the last minor relief scheme carried out in the county quite recently, I regret to say that that principle was departed from. In one area, Ballinamuck, a very substantial relief scheme of up to £70 was carried out, which is of advantage only to one person, and I do not know that it is of very much advantage to him either.

Why the work was carried out there is past comprehension. I refer to the Crowdrummin Pass, Ballinamuck. There was a recommendation made by the Deputies for the constituency on non-Party lines. Deputy Victory and myself made certain recommendations to the Department, but they were not carried out. This was carried out without, I think, any thought, while right beside this person, within two miles of him at most, you had an area known as Kilmahon Pass which accommodated not fewer than 15 families. The £70 expended on the Kilmahon Pass would have been of very great benefit to the people using that Pass, and would have given employment to a larger number of people. Unemployment was not nearly so serious in the Crowdrummin area as it is higher up on the mountain. Of course, relief schemes are always carried out in a hurried manner, and it is not easy for inspectors to get all the details, but where recommendations are made on non-Party lines I think that the Office of Public Works and the Parliamentary Secretary should give very definite consideration to them.

Mr. Flinn

I agree.

General MacEoin

The question of drainage was raised by Deputy Brodrick. In a number of cases where drainage schemes were carried out in County Longford demands are now being made for maintenance or for some payment by the people whose land the schemes affected. I cannot understand—to be quite candid, I have not fully looked into the matter—how the Department of Finance, or the Office of Public Works, or whoever is responsible, made the demands on those people for repayment of the sums expended in 1925 or 1926. I saw a scheduled list of farmers who were supposed to have benefited in the past from drainage that was carried out in the form of relief schemes, and now there is an annuity demanded from them to pay for this work. I think that is very unjust. The consent of those farmers was not sought, nor did they give consent. One or two, perhaps, in a district may have got more benefit than others, and may have thought it was good business on their part to get this work done. What I should like to know from the Parliamentary Secretary is how the system works, or by what means he adjudges or fixes the sum that each individual farmer should pay, because there could be a very great argument put forward as to the benefit that any one farmer receives. If one farmer receives considerable benefit and another receives none, it is not exactly right that the demand should be evenly distributed.

I know a district—I am sorry I have not the papers with me, but I will produce them for the Parliamentary Secretary at another time, if I may— in which at the moment a demand is being made upon 20 or 30 farmers for repayment of a sum expended on a certain area, although I am perfectly satisfied that not more than two farmers consented to the work being done. I think it is a fundamental principle that you cannot be levied in this way without your consent. The Government may possibly levy income tax or something like that, when the people are supposed to have got some benefit, but in this case they did not get any particular benefit. It may be argued that the Christian system was put in force and that their neighbour was benefited. I do not know that that appeals to the fellow who has to tale the money out of his pocket; I do not know that that works. The district I refer to is Drumeel, County Longford.

On the question of arterial drainage, we have the Camlin Arterial Drainage scheme in the County Longford, and it is in a very unsatisfactory position, because the area of assessment for the maintenance of the drainage area of Camlin has been fixed in a very haphazard way. It was a scheme adopted under the British Act of Parliament, before this State came into being, and the allocation of the charges has, as I say, been very haphazard. I think that the time has arrived when there should be a reexamination of the whole arterial drainage scheme of the Camlin. Documents and statements have been put into the Office of Public Works during the past three or four years; every year the same statement has been made upon the Camlin Arterial Drainage scheme, and I should be glad if the Parliamentary Secretary could have the matter examined. Some four or five months ago there was a suggestion made that a deputation should be sent from the Board to the Parliamentary Secretary. I believe such a deputation was sent, but I do not know with what result. It is a very important matter, because the area covered by the Camlin is extensive and the allocation of the charges for maintenance is not, in my opinion, equitable. In any case I do not think the people are able to bear the charges that would be necessary. Therefore, I suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that he should have the whole drainage of the Camlin basin examined to see if it would be possible to bring it in under any of the relief schemes for unemployment that there may be in the county. I think that it would serve a much better purpose, and be of much greater advantage to the people of the country than some of the minor relief schemes that have been put in force.

With reference to the non-Party proposals, there were two very important proposals put forward as regards the area from Killashee to the Shannon Basin. There are two rivers or small tributaries of the Shannon there, which have not been attended to for many years. If those rivers were attended to there are over one hundred small farmers who would be helped very considerably. The recommendation was put forward definitely on non-Party lines. It would do two things. It would drain the land which they have—it is not very good but we will call it arable land at the same time; it would also drain a very large area of bog, which would be of great advantage to the people there, because this bog produces practically 75 per cent. of the turf fuel that is sold in the town of Longford. If those two tributaries, running from outside Killashee to the Shannon, were attended to it would help the economic condition of the farmers and agricultural labourers who reside in that area. I think that that would be much better than spending £70 or £80 upon a foot-pass here or a one-man pass there. It would be of greater advantage to the people generally, as well as to the State; in other words, I think it would be good value for the money expended. While it is right that where there is unemployment relief should be given, I think at the same time that the second principle should always be kept in mind—that it is wise to get a good return for the money expended. In this particular area, there is a parish priest—I will not name him; unfortunately he is not a supporter of mine —who, in the past, got relief schemes working, and supervised or assisted in the supervision of them, with such good effect that he got work done on which five times the amount of money might have been expended without getting as good a return. He recommends this scheme, and I think if Deputy Victory were in the House he would bear me out when I say that in this particular case, if the money were expended, there would be a good return in every way. There is just another question or two that I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary. I notice that in connection with the Viceregal Lodge there is an increase in the Estimate of £100 this year as against last year. I would be glad to know the reason for that increased expenditure. In the year 1933-34 the expenditure was £3,817. For the year 1934-35 the expenditure is put down as £3,924. What is the cause of the increase, in view of the fact that the Viceregal Lodge is not now required for the purpose for which it was intended? I would like to know, also, what is the cost of the present residence of his Excellency the Governor-General. I have searched the accounts and cannot locate the exact figure——

Mr. Flinn

I do not think it comes under this Vote but I will look the matter up. We do not touch it and do not maintain it.

General MacEoin

He has a house of his own then?

Mr. Flinn

Apparently. I shall look the Estimate up and let the Deputy know.

General MacEoin

Last year we had an Estimate and I would like to know, having bought the house, did we then drop it or was it raffled? I should like to know where it has gone. On the question of the cancellation of those charges on farmers whose consent was not given, I would like the Parliamentary Secretary to examine the matter.

Mr. Flinn

I do not know whether there is any hope of the Dáil giving us this Vote this afternoon.

An Ceann Comhairle

Two Deputies behind the Parliamentary Secretary rose to speak just now.

Mr. Flinn

Yes. I do not think there is much chance of getting the Vote this afternoon. I would like to deal at once with one point put forward by Deputy MacEoin. He pointed out that there was a scheme carried out in Longford that ought not to have been carried out. He said that every effort should be made to see that there was no favouritism or partisanship shown in the distribution of money which this House has set apart for relief schemes. There we are on common ground. I ask the Deputy whether at any time before now he informed my Department of this particular grievance.

General McEoin

I think so.

Mr. Flinn

I should be glad if the Deputy would refer me to the particular case.

General MacEoin

In fairness to the Parliamentary Secretary, I want to say that the scheme was put before me and that I got an opportunity of examining the proposals and I admit that this particular case escaped my notice. It is very hard to identify a large number of works, notwithstanding that the Board of Works, as I admit, took every precaution and made every effort to have each work identified by reference to the maps, but this one did escape my notice. When it came to my knowledge that this particular work was on—it was only a £70 scheme—the men were working on it for at least ten days before I heard of it; therefore, the harm was done. Although I then mentioned it to the Office of Works, nothing could be done.

Mr. Flinn

There were over 1,900 minor relief schemes carried out. I am actually accepting the view that there must inevitably be cases of the kind mentioned by the Deputy. It does not matter on what side of the House a Deputy sits, if he finds that work is being carried out that ought not to be carried out, or that it is being carried out in a manner in which it ought not to be carried out, we will welcome a report on the matter and will have it investigated.

Mr. Moylan

Since the present Parliamentary Secretary has taken over the administration of the Board of Works, it seems to me that the work of the Department has been carried out on a strictly non-Party basis. We, who are interested in the grants allocated by that Department have tried to have the money expended in such a manner as would be consistent with the views of men who have national, rather than Party, ideals; but it is apparent that, at least some members of the Opposition believe that nothing could be done by any member of this Party except with a view to Party advantage. Deputy O'Leary, speaking on this Estimate, made the suggestion that Deputy Corkery and I promised before the election that we would supply lime for 1/- a barrel for minor relief schemes in Cork. Any promise we made, in regard to the distribution of lime in Cork, was carried out. Any money allocated for lime in minor relief schemes was efficiently used, and benefit accrued not merely to Fianna Fáil supporters but to Deputy O'Leary's supporters as well. I cannot help it if some of Deputy O'Leary's supporters saw the light, and saw the benefit that accrued to them from the fact that we have a Government in power which is inclined to look after their interests. Under every grant that we got, in North Cork, employment was allotted fairly without any consideration as to what Party the men who applied for work belonged. The work was carried out most efficiently, and we have a record in the district second to none in Ireland. In one particular instance in 1932, with a grant of £90 we did four times as much work on the same job as was done for £250 under the Cumann na nGaedheal Government.

Mr. Corkery

I would, also, like to say a word in praise of the way the work has been carried out in the constituencies of north and west Cork. As Deputy Moylan has said, more than double the work is being done with half the money at the present time. Sometimes reference is made as to the way the gangers are appointed on these works. The proof is there and the county surveyors' reports are there, and everyone admits that the work is done a good deal better at the present time than when the Cumann na nGaedheal Government was in power. I do not know how the work was done throughout the rest of the country during that time, but I know that more minor relief schemes were carried out and more work for the unemployed found in one year since this Government came into office than in the ten years that the Cumann na nGaedheal Government was in power. As regards lime, unfortunately the limekilns are very far away from the Gaeltacht parts of our constituency.

Progress reported. Committee to sit again on Wednesday.

The Dáil adjourned at 2 p.m. until Wednesday, 25th April, 1934.