The question of the rotation of labour has been raised by Deputy Goulding. Rotation is practically universal on minor relief schemes and I must say that it has been an extraordinary success. You all know the difficulty in selecting men for a scheme of that kind. We have found in practice that so long as men know that they are going to get a reasonable chance they are prepared both to go on to a scheme and to come off a scheme without difficulty or trouble or anything of that kind. There was an extraordinary psychological experiment performed in Europe many years ago which people did not notice very particularly—that is, the queue system. It was one of the basic human experiments. The fact that people knew there was going to be a fair deal has done away with the crowding, obstruction and trouble which used to take place in connection with entertainments and gatherings. In the same way in regard to minor relief schemes, both in regard to rotation and otherwise, the fact that we have succeeded in getting it over that there is going to be a fair deal has made this year extraordinarily peaceful and comfortable from our point of view. Rotation is a general practice. It is not followed always in regard to work done by local authorities. I mean that where we do a minor relief scheme we are directly responsible; but where we hand it over to a local authority they have very considerable responsibilities.
It would be worth while having on record the actual circumstances under which it is dealt with:—
"Rotation of labour. (a) Rotation of labour is not to be forced on contractors to Government Departments or to local authorities. (b) In the case of work financial wholly or partly from central funds undertaken by a State Department or by a local authority the adoption of a system of rotation of labour is to be optional and entirely at the discretion of the employing authority both in regard to its introduction and its incidence, but where there is in existence a scheme of rotation, 75 per cent. of the vacancies filled must go to married men who, inter se, will take precedence in the order of their ascertained need for employment, and 25 per cent. to single men, placed in the same order. When all the eligible men in the respective categories have had the periods of employment prescribed by the employing authority, then they may be employed over again in the same order as before.”
I may say further in relation to relief works and Government financed works that the tendency is for the custom of rotation to spread. Deputy Dockrell asked where provision appeared for the maintenance work on national monuments. It appears in Vote 11, in a sub-head at the top of page 51 of the Estimates, and the amount is £4,500. The maintenance of these monuments involves a good deal of care and expenditure and is supervised by specially selected clerks of works.
The estimate does not make provision for excavation. Normally a certain amount of work of excavation is carried out from private funds and the Government takes care that only properly skilled persons are allowed to do it. Out of the Unemployment Relief Grant for this year, to the extent to which approved works of national excavation are put up, and to the extent to which we are satisfied that they can properly be done by that means, an effort will be made to finance them. The Deputy also raised the question of Ballymote Castle, County Sligo, and Swords Castle, County Dublin, and wanted to know if these had been taken over. In general, the Government takes over monuments offered to it; these have not been offered to it. If either of these castles was offered to us we would sympathetically consider the matter.
Deputy Dockrell is evidently apparently under a wrong impression in regard to Ship Street and the headquarters of the Department of Industry and Commerce. The reference to Ship Street in the Estimates, which apparently misled him, is in italics because it refers to work provided for and carried out last year. It is contemplated that the new headquarters for the Department of Industry and Commerce will be in Kildare Street, although the matter is not absolutely settled. The Deputy was worried about some traffic difficulties. We are satisfied that those will not arise. The Deputy also referred to a suggestion for a new post office, instead of the post office at College Green, to be at the corner of St. Andrew Street and Trinity Street. The matter is not settled and there is no provision for it in the Estimates. He can be satisfied that if the scheme proceeds special care will be taken to see that it is properly planned for post office purposes.
Deputy Davin raised the hardy annual of the Douglas river drainage scheme. That is one of the schemes subsidiary to the Barrow. It cannot be dealt with until we are finished, not merely with the Barrow, but with the inquiries after the Barrow and all the financial questions which are involved. It is not being forgotten and it cannot be done until these are out of the way. As I said, it is not merely a question of waiting until we are technically, as it were, finished with the operations on the Barrow; we have certain legal and other inquiries to face before we can do it. Deputy Davin also raised the question of stamping the cards of men working on arterial drainage schemes. It has been decided that the ordinary labourer working on an arterial drainage scheme is not insurable under the Unemployment Insurance Act, although tradesmen working on a particular class of job are insurable. Those who are insurable are insured, and those who are not insurable are not insured. The Deputy also raised the question of the dismissal of certain men due to the withdrawal of one of our dredgers. The actual principle which the Deputy advocated in relation to the letting loose of men who had to be discharged was the scheme actually adopted. The men who had the shortest length of service were dismissed. The only real problem there was whether or not that dredger should have been retained as long as it was. Deputy Davin also raised the question of the completion of minor relief works left unfinished owing to insufficient funds. A definite instruction has been given that in relation to all schemes next year the actual state of existing unfinished schemes shall be examined before allocations are made to other works and, in addition to that, surveyors are asked to report on the completion of their minor relief scheme programme in relation to any work which is incompleted and on which they think more expenditure would be wise. I will be quite frank about it. I have just come across, in wandering over the country, works which just finished where they began to be effective. That may seem to Deputies to be a confession which one ought not to have to make. As a matter of fact, it is the most natural and right procedure in the circumstances if we are to look on this money which we have as relief money.
The House will remember that last year we put up a map showing the whole of the relief schemes through the country and showing the allocations to all districts prepared from a consideration of the geographical conditions, etc., and other such data as we got from local authorities, unemployment exchanges, etc. In other words, it was an empiric method of distribution and, broadly speaking, it was successful. This year, we attempted to provide a system which would be more minutely accurate in the fairness of its distribution. As some Deputies have said, the main object of minor relief schemes is undoubtedly rural (as distinct from urban) unemployment relief, and we took out the agricultural valuation of every single district electoral division in Ireland. We divided that by its population, getting by that means the valuation per head and then was fixed, depending on that average population per head, a "poverty factor" or "need factor" for each of those electoral areas. That "need factor" was then multiplied by the population of that district giving a new factor —what one might call, an allocation factor. The total of those allocation factors were divided into somewhere about 75 per cent. of the total amount which was available for minor reliefs and the money allocated on that basis to each of those electoral areas. The remainder was allocated on the basis of the actual ascertained agricultural labouring population in the district, with a certain allowance for the cases in which it was obvious that these calculations were not giving correct results. For instance, technically, the calculation of the need factor, multiplied by the population and divided into the total, would give an accurate figure but what we found was that, in certain electoral areas, the valuation might be thrown out altogether by the fact that there were three or four very big and, in some cases, very valuable, estates with high rateable valuations in it. A portion of the remaining 25 per cent. was used to correct obvious discrepancies of that kind.
On that basis, we have divided out the money this year and, while I think it has had one defect, that it has tended to make the size of the schemes smaller than they ought to be, it is, undoubtedly, judging by the indications we have of the general satisfaction given, an immense improvement. That would give you an explanation of unfinished works. You find that a work would cost £200 and that, in respect of one electoral division, to be fair, the only amount that you can allocate would be £100 and you have either got to do an inferior work or start a work you cannot complete, but in so far as the factors of need are pretty well constant, they are not caused by any sporadic effects of the circumstances through which we are passing at the moment. Broadly speaking, that is so. You will find that you have other proposals in the particular area in which, this year, you do work, and our intention is to follow up all unfinished works and as between two works, to give a strong preference to the work which was unfinished and to press it forward to its proper point. A good many of these works which are unfinished are operative and are actually doing good work, even though they have not gone as far as we should like to drive them. It is only a question of £100. For £200 you can get a certain amount of bog and bring about the relief of a certain number of people, in providing passages to one place or another, while for £300, you may be able to relieve twice as many. The House may take it that there is a definite intention to see that there are no what might be called dead-end works left unfinished that we can avoid.
Deputy Kelly suggested that motor cars should be excluded from the Phoenix Park in order to help the hackney coach trade and he specifically asked me not to give him a sympathetic answer. I cannot give him the answer he requires and I do not know that much can be done at all. After all, the Phoenix Park belongs to every user and it should be for every user and to subsidise that particular section, however much we should like to do it, does not seem to be a proper user of our authority in the matter. Deputy Brodrick raised the question of the Gárda Síochána barracks at Ballinasloe and Turloughmore. At Ballinasloe, efforts are being made to obtain a suitable site for a new building or a suitable building for adaptation. No time is being lost. The Deputy wanted a Gárda barracks built at Turloughmore. I am not the Minister for Justice. Ask him. If he says so, we will build them. With regard to the national schools at Colewood and Recess, the school at the former place, undoubtedly requires improvement. The matter has come to us and we have made suggestions. It is under discussion by the Department of Education and the school manager at the present time. The question of the school at Recess is not before us at present, but we understand that it is in the possession of the Minister for Education who will probably come to us shortly.
Another Deputy wanted to know why the Vote for the Marketing Board for rural industries had been increased while the Vote for carrageen and kelp development had been reduced. The Deputy is, apparently, under a misapprehension. The provision in Vote No. 11 for each of these services has been reduced, mainly, so far as the Office of Public Works is concerned, because the originally approved scheme of building is very far advanced and the cost is thus reduced. The Deputy also complained that no provision had been made for volunteer instruction halls. He will find in the Estimates that £50,000 was provided for buildings. Under sub-head A, a portion of £8,000 is also provided for the purpose of those halls. Naturally we are not in a position to give exact final information at the present moment, as the thing is actually under development. In connection with Athenry Agricultural Station, the Deputy wanted to know whether the work was done by contract or direct labour. The work has not yet been put in hand, and the method of doing it has not been settled. He wanted to know the cost involved in the change over from coal to turf in Government buildings. There is an increase of £1,000 in the Estimates under that head. I think it was he who also wanted to know whether there had been any experimental adaptation of grates for the purpose of turf burning, and whether the cost was justified. Only a very small part of that work has been done in the Board of Works, but a considerable amount I think has been done by the Ministry of Defence. The money expended has certainly been justified by the results. My own experiments have brought me to believe that the old people who burned turf flat on the floor, without any of the fancy provision that is now common, showed very great wisdom, and a good deal of scientific sense.
He also asked for an extension of the period for the repayment of charges under the Drainage Maintenance Act, 1934, to 35 years. That is not desirable from the point of view of the people whom the Deputy desires to benefit. The work done under the Drainage Maintenance Act is restoration only, and is really deferred maintenance, that is, maintenance which should have been done and paid for before. To ask the people to continue, for 35 years, paying for the deferred maintenance, having regard not merely to the change which was going on but to the compound interest piling up, would be very unjustifiable. The Deputy complains that the county council is raising the maintenance rates, and not maintaining the river. That is a matter for the people who elect members to the County Council. It is the County Council's business to do it, and it is the business of those who elect members of the County Council to see that the County Council does its business.
With regard to the Lough Corrib Drainage District, I think I met a deputation from Galway in relation to that last year. We went into the matter very carefully. That is a huge scheme. and the actual ascertained value of the improved land on any one of the schemes that were put up was so hopelessly out of line that they could not be considered. On that district we could spend anything up to £300,000, and the value to be got for it is inequitable. He also raised the question of the development of bogs for the turf industry. In addition to the money spent on bog roads for the purpose of enabling a man to get into his own turbary, there has been a considerable expenditure this year, and there will be a considerably greater expenditure next year, on the provision of roads into turbary, and the drainage and development of bogs for the commercial production of peat. I think the total amount we have spent this year on commercial turf production, as distinct from mere bog roads and drainage to enable a man to get his home supply of turbary is more than £24,000. That sum will be very considerably increased next year. Deputy Norton complained of the heating and ventilation of Leinster House. I know that when we sat over there our knees were frozen, and we had to put in some cardboard protection, which is now inuring to the benefit of our political opponents.
