Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 30 Mar 1939

Vol. 75 No. 3

Vote 41—Local Government and Public Health (Resumed).

When the debate was interrupted, I was speaking on the question of hospitals. I should like to say that from my experience of the hospitalisation of the City of Cork at the moment there does seem to be a lack of co-ordination in the Department. Bearing in mind that there are something like four hospitals to be built in Cork at a very big expenditure, we feel that there is great need of having some executive authority within the Department to deal with hospitals. For the past two or three years we have been acquiring sites and looking for the sanction of the Department for these sites. Then somebody else comes along and condemns the site selected, with the result that we are still without the two hospitals which we feel should have been started in Cork within the past two years. Personally I believe, seeing that the Department have the spending of anything up to £8,000,000, that they should have architects of their own, working from the Department, to plan hospitals for the respective areas. We also feel that in planning these hospitals architects are sometimes inclined to go in for very elaborate plans and for expensive hospitals. In Cork, where we have had two architects to plan a hospital, our experience is that architects are inclined to plan hospitals on a most extensive scale. They do not always consider the cost of maintaining these hospitals afterwards, a matter to which Deputy Dillon referred, so that there is great need for some responsible officer in the Department or for some section dealing with hospitalisation.

We have discussed the matter of the hospitals in Cork with the Minister and I would suggest to him that it is necessary to have some responsible officer in the Department to plan hospitals and also that in planning hospitals there should be more consultation with the local authority. We have suggested to the Department on a few occasions that when officers of the Department come to Cork to deal with plans, they should consult with the local authorities. I am now repeating that suggestion. When architects or officers of the Department go to local areas we would expect them to get into closer contact with members of the board or with executive officers of the board before returning to Dublin and coming to a decision.

I have in mind a matter dealing with a hospital in the City of Cork, where a certain thing was decided upon and the building completed. A suggestion was then put up for another hospital, and we had a letter from the Department stating that there should be a central building to cover the requirements of the South Cork area. That was done without consultation with the board of health or with the officials responsible. I feel that there is great need to have some man with executive authority to deal with the hospitalisation of the country. In connection with relief grants, we have from time to time been given large sums for such work and, in addition, we supplemented it by money from the rates. As it looks as if these demands will be recurring it is too much to be asking local authorities to subscribe the second time. In the City of Cork we are paying 1/8 in the £ towards the unemployment relief fund. When we got a grant of £38,000 we had to supplement it by raising £7,500 in rates, and the worst feature about the matter was that we were asked to expend that £45,000 on roads and footpaths. I maintain that a local authority, such as Cork Corporation, has many more pressing problems than the making of roads and footpaths. For instance, as a water reservoir and sewerage work are badly needed, the members of a local authority should have some say as to how money could be spent to the best advantage. I know that the Department is anxious that the money should be spent in a way that would give the greatest amount of employment, but I consider that the making of a reservoir and the improvement of the sewerage of the city, which has been planned for years, and which is likely to cost £500,000, is the class of work upon which the £45,000 should be spent, and that it should not be confined to the making of roads. I wish that the Department would reconsider its attitude in that respect.

The Minister, and also Deputy Dillon, referred to the question of housing. I am not going to minimise what has been done by the Department about housing since 1932, but unfortunately in Cork we are held up for the last four or five months by lack of money. We asked for money at 4 per cent., but because of certain circumstances we were unable to get the amount we required. We have asked the Minister to meet a deputation in order to discuss the best means of getting out of the difficulty, but we have not yet got the opportunity of doing so. We have acquired land, plans are prepared and the men are ready to commence work, but the fact is that schemes of work are held up for want of money. I am afraid that this Government or any other Government will only govern normally as long as they can be dictated to by those who control the money. I impress upon the Government of the day that until we face up to the reality of that situation we will have the housing problem with us for many years.

What is the suggestion?

The suggestion is one that was barred by the Chair. Credit and currency are not relevant to this debate.

Deputy O'Rourke called attention to a case where a number of cottages were built by a board of health in corners of fields. I agree with the Deputy's views. It is wrong that that should be done. On Sunday last I saw eight cottages crowded into a field in the midst of open country, where plenty of latitude could be given. It is an awful thing in 1939 to build eight or ten cottages on an acre of land in an outlying area of the country. These cottages should have been put in different parts and an acre of land should be attached to each one. Having to deal with social services in the City of Cork, I consider there is a great lack of co-ordination in the Department. I feel that there is a need for two Ministers, one to concern himself with social services and the other with the administration of local government. It is impossible, in view of the growth of our social services, for one Minister to deal with all of them. Having gone to the Department from time to time, I must say this of the officials: that I always met with courtesy there, and that the Minister was always inclined to be helpful. At the same time, I feel that there is not co-ordination in the Department, because if you go to one part you are sent some place else, while from correspondence that comes before public boards it is apparent there is not co-ordination. I do not want to elaborate that point, but I should like to see the executive officials in the different sections getting together and having some helpful suggestions for the Minister with a view to co-ordination of the various services. I do not want to see sections dealing with home help, old age pensions, widows' and orphans' pensions, child welfare and other matters overlapping, because that would mean waste.

As far as organisation goes, I am sure the Minister must have had experience of the fact that something is lacking, when we have so many decisions about plans and specifications of buildings. I have in mind two cases that occurred in Cork, where the provision of hospitals is under way since 1932. The sites were acquired, paid for and then scrapped. That was a clear indication that there is no co-ordination in the Department, and, for that reason, I suggest that it would be advisable to have one Minister dealing with social services, and another Minister concerning himself with the other side of the public health services. As far as Cork is concerned, the fact is that we have an appalling housing situation there. We have over 3,000 applications for houses. Some of these people are homeless. Others are living in rooms and hovels that have been condemned by dispensary doctors, who have asked me if something could not be done to remedy the position.

Mr. Walsh

How long have you had these places?

A long time.

Mr. Walsh

They have been forgotten for many years.

That is the crime of the whole thing, that the people in these places have been so long forgotten. I am not suggesting that any Government could be expected to remedy the position at once, but the problem is there, and we should not be afraid to face up to it. As Deputy Dillon pointed out, there is a fearful danger in such poverty. The men are there to do the work, the materials are there, and the ground prepared, but the schemes cannot be gone on with, because a group of people control the money. That matter should be looked into.

In a Vote such as this, there are many subjects which might be touched upon, but I merely wish to refer to the housing question. The housing question is many-sided and it requires a certain amount of knowledge, in approaching it, to see that people do not make suggestions which, in the light of future experience, turn out to be absurd. It is only a short time ago that we were told there were not sufficient building operatives to go round and that certain classes of building in the city would have to stop in order that housing for the working classes might go on. The present situation in the city, as I understand it, is that there are nearly 4,000 operatives out of employment. There are somewhere about 3,000 on the live register, and a number who have fallen out of benefit and who are not on the register at the moment.

Are these skilled operatives?

Skilled and unskilled.

I did not think there were so many skilled operatives.

There are not 4,000 skilled operatives. I am speaking of skilled and unskilled. Labourers are required in the building of houses, as the Deputy knows.

I think the Deputy is under-estimating it.

Possibly, I am. However, the point I wish to make is that while housing is a tremendous problem and everybody will agree that the housing of the working classes is most important, the problem requires to be divided into sections in order that we may get a correct perspective. You have the problem of housing for the working classes which the corporation are doing their best to solve and you have the wealthier classes who can get houses put up as they require them and pay for them. Between those two classes of the community, there is an enormous field for houses for people who cannot put up the money for a house. They require help of some sort.

I remember saying on a Vote here some time ago that anybody in the City of Dublin who put up a cottage or a palace was contributing to the solution of the problem because it moved people up. I want to enlarge on that, and, to prove that, I would cite the position here as against the position across the water in respect of houses. Houses here which are put up for the working classes are roughly 40 per cent. dearer than similar houses across the water, but there is an intermediate type of house, namely, pre-war or basement house. It has played its temporary part in this city in providing a shelter for the people who had nowhere else to go, and as a proof of how vitally important that was and how great the scarcity was here, I think that most experts on the value of houses would agree that while the house just put up here is 40 per cent. dearer than a similar house across the water, the pre-war house with a basement is twice as dear. What does that prove? It proves that while the house here has more than held its value, due to an artificial shortage, because of the operation of the law of supply and demand, the less useful house across the water has slumped. I think the Minister should be able to read the signs aright and to see that that means that every kind of shelter that can be used temporarily will be pressed into service and that when houses, no matter of what kind or description, are put up, people move up and others move into them.

We are all familiar with what has happened in this city in certain parts of the north side, where houses were occupied by the nobility in one generation, by the middle classes in the next and by a humbler set of citizens later on. I am not advocating that as the ideal solution, but it is ideal compared with either leaving people in the street or leaving them in insanitary basement houses. That being so, one would have thought that the Minister and the Government would have concentrated their attention on housing in the City of Dublin. I am not going to accuse the Minister of having a spite against the City of Dublin, or against the builders here, but certainly he has dissembled his love for them with great care. There is no money available under the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Act, and, so far as other grants are concerned, I think they have been withdrawn from the City of Dublin, although they are continued in the country districts and given to approved societies, although they are not given to the builders who put up these houses. I have not the slightest hesitation in saying that the Minister is as keen as anybody else to see houses built, but I should like to suggest to him that some means must be found to assist the people who cannot purchase their own houses. I understand that there is legislation promised for the autumn, but by the time the autumn arrives and the trade are able to digest that legislation, a year will have gone by, and I do not think that anybody could say but that the signs of the impasse that was arising have been apparent for many months, if not for some years.

I am not going to talk about the relief of unemployment on this Vote, but it seems to leak into this question of houses. I understand it has always vexed the Government, in making unemployment grants, to find the type of grant which would have an enormous amount of unskilled labour in it and yet give some return to the community. I think that has pressed the Government so hard that, at times, one could recognise the job on which relief was given by the way it was worked. I am not reproaching the Government for that.

I am suggesting, however, that they do not take a wide enough view: that there are some cases where, probably, the content of other labour is possibly high compared with what they would like. At the same time, there is a very great difference between unemployment relief that will give a return to the community and pay for itself and what is merely a drag on the pockets of those who provide the money. From that point of view, I should like to reinforce what has been often put up to the Minister, namely, that a certain amount of consideration should be given to some way in which the gap, between what people can provide and the paying for their houses, could be bridged over.

I think the experience of the corporation, where they advanced money under the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Act, was that in a few, a very few, cases—and I think they involved two coincidences, namely, that the house had been badly built and the tenant insolvent—the corporation were stuck with a small amount of money; but that amount of money was infinitesimal when it was spread over the millions that it enabled to be handed out and the houses it enabled to be peopled. Now, I do not know where the working class ends and the middle class begins, but there is no doubt about it: there are many people scrambling for houses for the working classes, who can quite legitimately contend that they are workers and belong to the working class, who, given an opportunity to purchase a house, would, with assistance, enter into the other ranks and so relieve the pressure on the ranks of their poorer-paid brethren in the working classes.

I would like to appeal to the Minister to make an effort at the earliest possible moment to solve this housing question in a broad and generous spirit. Of course, there is no doubt that funds will have to be provided. At the same time, it is to bridge a gap. It is not a question of providing the whole sum of money. I would like to suggest to the Minister that that can be done, and that, if there were losses —and, like everything else, I suppose there would be losses—they would be infinitesimal compared with the number of houses that would be built, the employment that would be given, and the numbers, who are seeking houses, that would be taken out of the ranks and who are at present really scrambling for corporation houses. I would urge on the Minister to go on with his Bill and produce it at the earliest possible moment because, as far as I can see, if the Bill is produced in the autumn, it will take the trade another six months; the winter will be coming along and they are not going to start cutting foundations in the winter, and it will take a 12-month, as we look at it, before any real attempt will be made to face this question.

It is not my intention to take up the time of the House for a very long period. I deeply regret that I was not present for the Minister's speech when he was introducing this Estimate, because I was intensely interested to know what were the most recent views of the Minister on the operation of the voluntary hospitals system in Dublin. It seems to be the practice that, when Ministers are introducing their Estimates, or the Estimates of their respective Departments, and reviewing the Ministerial sphere of activities of the preceding year, they don the rose-tinted spectacles, and always report progress, and practically never refer to any slight retrogression in the Department. I am satisfied, however, from the views which the Minister for Local Government and Public Health has expressed in recent months in the Press, in relation to the hospitals system, that he takes a very realistic view of matters, and that he sees things in their true perspective.

The operation of this system in the City of Dublin, in so far as it concerns the provision of beds for the working classes and the sick poor, is most unsatisfactory. Now, that is the case in spite of the fact that there is a continuous upward trend in maintenance charges and in expenditure generally. I am not one of that magic circle of medicos who so magnanimously and so gratuitously staff the voluntary hospitals in Dublin. I am only an ordinary general practitioner, practising for a working class district, and I repeat that the provision of beds in the voluntary hospitals for the working classes and the sick poor is as bad now as it was five years ago. In connection with this matter, there is a paragraph from the recent Report of the Hospitals Commission, which I should like to read. It is only a short paragraph, and it is on page 4 of the report. The heading is "Hospital Development during 1937," and it reads as follows:—

"There has been considerable activity during the year in an effort to find a satisfactory solution of the Dublin general hospital problem. The Commission's recommendations (vide First General Report) envisaged transferring the responsibility for the hospital treatment of all acute cases in the Dublin area from the Board of Assistance to the voluntary hospitals, or alternatively the erection of a municipal hospital. The adoption of the former requires certain essential safeguards to ensure that the statutory obligations of the Board of Assistance to provide hospital treatment for all poor persons within its jurisdiction will be adequately discharged by the voluntary hospitals, in so far as the type of case ordinarily treated in general hospitals is concerned; namely, acute illness. The Commission has recommended that these safeguards can be provided by, firstly, suitable agreements between the voluntary hospitals and the local authorities concerned, and secondly, the provision of a Hospital Information Bureau, which would facilitate as ready admission to the wards of the voluntary hospitals as would exist in the case of a municipal hospital directly under the control of the local authority. Negotiations are in progress between the Minister and the chief interests concerned, to ascertain how far the voluntary hospitals can discharge the local authorities' responsibilities in respect of the type of sick poor referred to. The ultimate outcome of these efforts to find a satisfactory solution to the problem will have an important bearing on the general hospital development in the Dublin area. It is much to be desired that both the voluntary hospitals and the local authorities will recognise fully the complementary part they each play in the hospital sphere and, acting in this spirit, will develop a hospital scheme which will be rational, economic and mutually satisfactory.

In connection with that statement, so far as I know, no satisfactory arrangement as yet has been arrived at for the establishment of such a general hospital scheme. I should like, in the event of a satisfactory conclusion not being arrived at, following the negotiations between the Minister's Department and the interested parties, if the Minister would indicate whether or not he would be prepared to take immediate steps to establish a State or municipal hospital.

I do not want to dwell too much on this matter of the unsatisfactory provision of beds, but there really is not equality of opportunity with regard to rich patients and poor patients. There is only the type of opportunity which Anatole France referred to when he said that millionaires and hawkers alike were forbidden by law to sleep under the bridges in Paris.

There is another point which I would like to make: it is in connection with public health, and has relation to school children. So far as I am aware, there is not included in the curricula in the primary schools the teaching of physical culture. I do not want to be misunderstood in this matter. I am not suggesting that this subject of physical culture should be taught by the primary teachers. I suggest that the Minister might very usefully experiment by employing a small number of physical culture specialists who would work under the supervision of the school medical inspectors. I believe that would be a step in the right direction, and would tremendously improve the standard of health of our school children.

There is one further point I wish to raise. I note with regret that, so far, the Minister has not taken serious notice of the claims of the nursing profession for the establishment of a pension fund. I am sure that nobody better than the Minister realises the tremendously valuable work done by the members of that profession. They are not overpaid and, surely, they should be able to look forward to the retiring years of their lives with the prospect of a little frugal comfort. I trust the Minister will find time to deal with the few points I have made.

Mr. Brodrick

My criticism on this Estimate will be as helpful as I can possibly make it, but there are some complaints which I have to submit. We have here a huge Estimate, which has increased from £481,000 in 1931 to £1,349,000 at the present day. In dealing with the matter of housing, so far as I am aware of the activities of the Housing Department under the Minister's control, I must say they are doing their work very well. Throughout the country, however, there are complaints being made to local authorities, such as boards of health. I must say that there are not very many of these complaints. They are to the effect that the houses are not erected as they ought to be erected, and a good deal of the money expended is really wasted. The houses that are expected to stand up according to their specifications are not as well built as they might be. I have heard of several complaints made to boards of health. I am very pleased to say that it is not often we hear those complaints, but there should not be a case of that sort at all.

I do not blame the Minister or his Department. I believe the local authorities are not exercising their supervision over the men who should see that these houses are properly constructed. There are many men appointed as clerks of works and I may state, for the Minister's benefit, that these men were appointed for political reasons and because of their political affiliations. That is why these men were appointed by boards of health and, in the majority of cases, they have no experience of the work they are asked to do. I think the Minister should see to it that the inspectors from his Department should make sure that if these men are not fit to carry out their work they should be dismissed at once from the service.

We do not sanction those appointments unless they are recommended by the local engineer in every case.

A man who, very often, is a politician himself.

That may be so; but, after all, he stakes his professional reputation.

I agree, that is correct.

For that matter, there are politicians on both sides, on Deputy Brodrick's side just as much as on this side. But we do insist that the engineer, or the architect, as the case may be, will put his name down when he says the man is qualified.

Mr. Brodrick

I have no doubt engineers will put their names to it that he is qualified, but he is often qualified because he is a supporter of Fianna Fáil.

Or a supporter of Deputy Brodrick. The Deputy knows what has happened just as well as I do; he knows that his people have done the same thing. Is that not so?

One is as bad as the other?

And Deputy Belton knows all about it, too.

Mr. Brodrick

Whatever about the politics, I would like that we would get good work done.

Mr. Brodrick

I am sure the Minister and his Department are doing their best to get good work done. It is quite possible that the Government went too fast with their housing policy and that they did not give it sufficient consideration. I am one of those who will say that it did go too fast and, if it got more consideration, and if the building programme was more prolonged, you would have had much better building done throughout the country and you would have helped the people who were in bad houses much more. There was one particular phase of it when everyone was shouting for new houses. If we go back 15 years and think of what the Congested Districts Board did in areas even adjacent to towns, we can better realise what could be done. I am sure we all remember the small thatched houses, and they were very nice houses. The Congested Districts Board, in years gone by, where a house could be made habitable for £30, would spend that money on increasing the window space, renewing the thatch on the roof, raising the floors, and putting in new doors. That made them very nice houses. What we have done to-day is knocked all those houses down to about six feet and now they are the dumping ground for the refuse of the towns to which they are adjacent. I thought when those small houses were knocked down that the board of health would at once build on them. Most of them have small gardens attached and I know that in several areas the small gardens are much more suitable for working men living close to towns than an acre of ground. They can attend to the small garden. It is all right to say that every man is entitled to an acre of ground. I would say the agricultural labourer, who is continually engaged in agriculture and who lives away from a town, who has more or less his own time, is entitled to an acre of ground. I would say the man in the town is entitled to it, if he could work it, but he is not able to work it.

The man who lives adjacent to a town, let him be working on a building scheme or a carpenter, whatever he may be, has to work from eight in the morning until six o'clock in the evening, and by the time he is finished at six in the evening he is not fit to work an acre of ground. I think the plots should be made smaller. I think it was Deputy Hickey who said they were too small in Cork. What I find about the small towns in the West of Ireland is that an acre of ground is too much and I would be glad if the Minister could see his way to suggest to the board of health to make the plots smaller. Reports are heard that there is a shortage of land and that land is too dear. If you gave a half acre of ground instead of the acre you would find that the town workers who live within a mile or a mile and a half of a town will be very satisfied to get a cottage with that amount of land. I know houses in my own district adjacent to towns which were built within the last two years and I feel that the acre of ground attached to those houses will never be tilled. Therefore, I would ask the Minister, in considering other schemes, to substitute the half acre. Then it would be possible to get land.

There is another drawback which I see down the country in regard to the purchase of land for labourers' cottages. You will get land adjacent to the towns which carries a much higher valuation than land out in the country. You will get land near towns, what they call "cow parks" and so forth, and the board of health are anxious to acquire them for cottages. These lands usually carry from £1 to £1 10s. valuation per acre. The price of that acre of land is £50. Three miles further out, in the country, you will find that the same or worse type of land carrying 2/- or 3/- per acre valuation, gets the same price. I think it is most unfair that the same price should rule.

We also learn that the Minister has refused sanction for a loan to erect 300 extra cottages in County Galway. At least, I have seen it on the paper. He gave a sound reason, I admit—that the whole matter will have to be investigated by the county medical officer of health and the local engineers. That is quite right. But that survey was made some years ago and my point is that we have not the number of houses in County Galway that that survey carried with it. If we had, I would agree with the Minister in having another survey. Certainly, there is one thing that has happened in Galway; in places where cottages were not needed at all they have been erected and there are other places that are really slums where you have, in a country district, miles away from the town, eight houses all in a line.

There was no work for the ordinary labourers there. They were without means of livelihood. They took them over. They have little shops in them. while there are people with motor-cars and so forth getting a house at half-a-crown a week. That has happened down there. Without a survey at all. I think the county medical officer of health has gone through the county often enough and should be able to give the Minister sufficient information as to the number of houses still required there.

In all my criticism I would like to be helpful and, as far as I can see, in most areas the houses have been well built, but in some instances you have people appointed as clerks of works who do not know their job, and there is not sufficient supervision in some areas. In the urban area of Galway you will find 19 houses half-built, and neither the Galway Corporation nor anyone else knows who has got to complete them. I would say that the corporation were not responsible for the position. It was the urban council of two years ago that was responsible for it. The houses are there and most of them are roofed, but they are all boarded up by the corporation. There is neither water nor sewage schemes connected to them. No one knows who is to finish them.

In connection with engineering in Galway, which I brought to the notice of the Minister before, I learn now that some co-ordination scheme is about to come into operation down there. All I am sorry for is that some attempt was not made long before this, because a number of Deputies here know that, not alone is there overlapping in the Department but there is also overlapping in the local offices, just the same as you have a man doing road work in one area and another man coming over that same road work and building houses, under the board of health. I learn now that the Department are anxious to have one county surveyor there with one engineer in charges of the board of health work, and two chief assistant surveyors. All I hope is that they will put the scheme into operation as soon as they possibly can.

On the question of roads, I find, going through the country, that there is no standard at all for any of the counties. I would be glad if the Roads Department could see their way to have a standard for the main roads. There are some counties where the roads cost £1,600 a mile, and then you run into a county where the cost of the roads is £500 a mile, where the surface is bad and where you are not safe at all in travelling on them. It is only recently, I think, that engineers have got really some system. In some counties you will see saddle-backed roads and in other counties they are pretty flat. I would ask the Minister, where so much money is being spent, that there should be at least a standard specification for all main roads. There is no use in one county expending, say, £40,000 or £50,000 on its roads and looking for grants every other day and another county spending, say, £20,000, and, by some means or other, showing that they have a register of unemployed of so many and must get increased moneys. I think the Minister or the Roads Department should go as far as they possibly can in connection with the standardising of the roads.

I think also that we should expend something more on the district roads. There is plenty of work to be done on them. There is a good deal of work being done on the main roads in straightening them out and taking off corners and I must say it is very useful work and it is being very well done. In the west, great attention is being paid to it, and the only drawback I see is that we have not given enough attention to the district roads.

With regard to tourist development and tourist routes, it will be found, I think, that the Irish Tourist Association and the county surveyors seem to be directing their minds to the one end. The ratepayers in the County Galway are contributing something like £1,000 a year to Irish tourist development, but so far as I can observe no attempt is being made by the Department, which gives grants, or by any other authority to see that new beauty spots and places of historic interest off the usual routes are developed as they ought to be, and brought to the notice of tourists. All tourists seem to make for the one end—Killarney, West Cork, Donegal, etc.

This Estimate deals with the provision of sanatoriums. About 17 years ago a site for a santorium was selected in the County Galway, at Woodlands, which is beside the sea. The site was condemned by the local people, but the Department and the county medical officer of health had to get their way. Thousands of pounds were spent on that particular site. Within the last four or five years the site at Woodlands was found not to be suitable. I am sorry that the Chairman of the Galway Board of Health is not here to hear me out on this. On the recommendation of the Department's engineer and of the county medical officer of health another site was selected at Kilcolgan on which additional thousands of pounds were spent. I do not know what has happened in connection with this site. Perhaps the county medical officer of health disliked having to go out so far from Galway City. At any rate, a request has come from the Department of Local Government to look for another site and dispose of Kilcolgan.

That is the position in the County Galway with regard to the selection of a site for a sanatorium. Two sites on which thousands of pounds have been spent have been turned down. That is not fair to the board of health. I do not know whether he meant it by way of joke or not, but in connection with Kilcolgan the secretary to the board of health said : "The only thing you can do with it now is to sell it as a dance hall." The Department should not be a party to the waste of public money in that fashion. They should send down inspectors who know their work and get them to select a suitable site, and not have the ratepayers' money wasted, as it has been, on these two sites.

I now wish to deal with the question of contracts for free milk down the country. I propose to refer to a number of documents which I can let the Minister have if he wants to see them. I have tenders here for the supply of free milk for 1938 and 1939. The tenders for 1938 went before the home assistance committee. It accepted a tender for free milk to a particular district. I may say that two tenders were received, both proposing to supply milk at the same price. Both were sent on to the Department, and the Department, quite rightly I admit, recommended that the contract be given to the former supplier who owned a number of cows. That was all right. Where the snag comes in is this: that the home assistance officer went to the other man whose tender was accepted by the local body and said "You can supply from October to March at the same price as the man who is supplying from March to October." What happened in 1939? Two tenders were received, one at 1/4 a gallon and the other at 1/3½ a gallon. The premises of the two people tendering complied in every respect with the requirements of the Cowsheds and Dairies Order. Both were inspected and approved by the Department's inspector, the county surveyor and the veterinary surgeon for the area. The person who tendered at 1/3½ received this notification, dated the 18th March, 1939: "I beg to inform you that the county homes assistance committee accepted at their meeting on the 18th inst., your tender for the supply of milk"—in so-and-so area—"for the year commencing the 1st of April, 1939, subject to the approval of the Local Government Department." The secretary wrote to say that he had forwarded a list of the tenders received to the Department. A reply was received from the Department stating: "Tenders approved in accordance with list of contractors accepted"—at so-and-so for so-and-so place—"which accompanied the above-mentioned letter. The Department is in communication with the county medical officer of health in regard to the tenders received for the supply of milk"—to such-and-such a place—"and a further letter will be addressed to you in due course."

That refers to the tender accepted by the local committee, the members of which knew the two people who tendered. They knew that one was tendering at ½d. a gallon less than the other, and knew them the year before. Yet the Minister's Department thought fit to send down the tenders to the county medical officer of health. I would like to know what was at the back of that, especially in view of the fact that the two people tendering had complied with all the requirements of the Cowsheds and Dairies Order. I do not think it was fair of the Department to do that. It is certainly not fair to public boards. It was not fair to the board in this case which accepted a tender from a man who was prepared to supply milk at a lower price than the other. I do not think it is fair to have public boards treated in that manner. If the Minister wants to see these documents he can have them.

Some Deputy, speaking earlier, referred to the amount of work that now falls on boards of health to do. I submit that it is impossible for a board of health to get through all its work by meeting on one Saturday in the month. Quite a number of Deputies are members of boards of health. I am acquainted with one board of health, and I can say that before Christmas it actually had to meet on three Saturdays in succession in order to dispose of the agenda that was put before it. Men cannot continue to do that. The day will come when the business will be done in a slipshod way. Some of the duties should be taken off these boards. There is too much work piled on to them at present. Some means will have to be taken to relieve them of some of that work.

Managers.

Mr. Brodrick

Something will have to be done. There are, for instance, the free meals schemes. Urban councils and town commissioners administer these schemes in their own areas. The boards of health also have to administer them. How can these boards administer these schemes properly? I say they cannot. The Minister should consider some means by which the work would be made easier for them, so that they can do it in a thorough fashion. Unless that is done something will turn up some day for which we will all be very sorry, because the work cannot continue to be done in the way in which it is done at present. In small towns with a population of from 600 to 1,000, which have not town commissioners, there should be some kind of small committees set up which would be of help to the boards of health. By having recommendations made to them by these committees, the work would probably be made easier.

As regards the work of the Department generally, as I said in the beginning, I criticise the Department but I wish to be helpful. As regards their housing policy, I can say from what I know of housing that they have done very well. It is quite possible that we may have gone a little too fast. If we had gone a little slower we might possibly have got better work done. However, it had to be done. There were a number of houses to be built each year and we have had them built. I hope the Minister will see his way to continue to help local authorities and, where he has refused to sanction a loan, I hope that a survey will be made at as early a date as possible, because I know that local authorities are anxious to build more cottages. There are some places certainly where they are needed.

It is gratifying to hear the appreciation from all sides of the House for the work done by the Department of Local Government and for the progress made by the various sections of the Department. That is only as it should be. No Department of State enters more intimately into the lives of the citizens than the Department of Local Government. There are a few points on which I am anxious to express an opinion. I do not approve, for instance, of the wholesale centralisation of hospitals. Like Deputy Morrissey, I believe that there should be hospitals left in certain districts to accommodate certain types of cases which do not really require expert medical treatment and where certain patients can find a place of rest until they get back their health.

Of course I may be met by the argument that, with modern transport, up-to-date ambulances, etc., distance is of no account these days. To a certain extent that is true. But for the man who cannot afford to travel by means of modern transport, 20 miles is as long a distance as it was 20 years ago. The man who has to travel in a donkey cart, or who has to walk, will take just as long to cover the distance. These are the people for whom we should cater. It is on their behalf that I ask the Minister to retain the local cottage hospitals throughout the country.

Coming to the question of county homes, I come from a constituency in which the county home system was abolished in 1930 or 1931. Having personal knowledge of the change for the better that has taken place, I recommend the Minister to think out a scheme for transferring the inmates in all the other county homes in the country to institutions similar to the one in North Cork. One thing that the Irish people always took exception to was to be branded as paupers. Although I agree that the lot of the inmates in county homes has improved very much since the old workhouse days, still I hold that there is some taint of pauperism still attached to the people who have to reside in county homes. I believe that very good humanitarian work would be done if these homes were abolished altogether and replaced by institutions where the inmates could be paid for by the local boards on a capitation basis—institutions controlled by a religious order like the one we have in North Cork.

As to the maintenance of the main roads of the country, I might not go altogether as far as Deputy Broderick, but I ask the Minister to consider giving a substantially increased grant for the maintenance of county roads. There is a growing demand for that through the country and I believe there is justice in that demand. I also ask the Minister to consider giving a substantially increased contribution to mental hospitals throughout the country. We are all happy to know that the hospital programme of the Department has made considerable strides in the past few years. One thing I personally disapprove of, in the rural towns at any rate, is the building of workers' houses in one block at one end of a town. It is not fair to the workers, to the traders, or to the general public. If, for instance, 40 houses are to be built in a rural town, I suggest that they should be built, if possible, in four different sections— one section at each point of the compass around the town. I think that would be a better plan than bulking them all together. Of course I understand that for engineering purposes it is easier to build them all together, and also from the point of view of the water supply and sanitation. But, after all, in building these houses we are catering for people who must work for a living and who, in order to get work, often have to travel a certain distance from their homes. If you bulk them all together you are reducing the chance of all of them getting work in the district.

As I said, I appreciate the progress that has been made with the Department's housing programme, but I am not fully satisfied that the local board in North Cork have gone as far as they could have gone in regard to the housing problem. I do not want in any way to underestimate or belittle the amount of housing they have done, as they have carried out some housing schemes.

There is one type of people for whom they have not catered yet. I refer to a large number of workers in a certain number of towns and villages in the North Cork area. In some of these towns and villages you have a real slum problem. A certain number of people are living under very unsanitary conditions. I need not impress that on the Minister, as he was good enough to inspect that area some years ago and see for himself the conditions under which the people live. But I appeal to him to see that the local board puts its housing policy into force immediately so far as these towns are concerned. To my mind, this board has not its heart in its work so far as the building of town houses for workers is concerned. So far as I can gather, their chief objection is to taking compulsory powers to acquire the sites needed for these houses. I have heard of an instance in which they proposed recently, in the case of a certain village in North Cork, to take compulsory powers to acquire a site. Bordering on that village there are four fairly substantial farms with an acreage of 60 to 160, and one plot of five acres. It happened that within the past week the board's engineers, or some engineers, went out to inspect the sites and, of all places, they pitched on this site of five acres. Worse than that, this plot of five acres is not at present in the possession of anybody, as the receivers of an unfortunate bankrupt are in charge of it, and the matter is in dispute. My opinion is that the inspection of this plot, with a view to acquiring it, is only a pretence, because they know very well there will be serious local objection to the acquisition of these five acres.

I raised this matter last year, and I think the Minister should take his courage in his hands, and, if the boards of health in any area are not availing of the facilities provided for them under the Housing Acts, he should himself put somebody into the district who will do the job and house the unfortunate people. That is the biggest fault I have to find with the work of the Department, or, in other words, with the neglect of the Department. The board blames the Department, and the Department blames the board. The Minister is master in his own house, and I appeal to him to put these housing schemes in operation in the coming year, and make provision for the workers of that area in North Cork.

There is one other matter to which I should like to draw the Minister's attention. Under the Medical Charities Act, labourers are entitled to free medical treatment. I do not know whether or not I am trespassing on forbidden ground, but I would like to suggest that the benefits of the Medical Charities Act should be extended to a type of people who are neither labourers nor people with an independent living. I refer to people of the small farming type. I suggest that the Minister should seriously consider extending the benefits of the Medical Charities Act to these people, as many of them, when they fall ill, suffer as no other section of the community suffers because of absence of medical treatment.

I think that this is a Vote which we should consider more in sorrow than in anger—sorrow, that a Department which touches the average man, as the last Deputy who spoke has said, more than any other Department of State, should be in such a position that it seems to be incapable of keeping up to date in matters appertaining to the local authorities. I am perfectly sure there is not a member of a local authority in this House who is not aware of matters in his own neighbourhood which have been outstanding with the Department for months—and years, in many cases. In many of these cases, not only is the matter not dealt with, but letters sent by the local authority to the Department are not even acknowledged.

I would I were an orator that I might lash the Minister with my tongue—not with a whip, which is his weapon—into some form of activity which would clear up the vast amount of arrears which must exist in his Department. The Minister may say that he has more work than he has staff to deal with it. If that be so, surely he himself is largely responsible because, by degrees, the autonomy of the local authorities is being taken from them. Very soon, if things progress as they are progressing, the local authorities will not be allowed to sneeze without the Minister's permission. If the Minister considers that the local authorities are not competent to carry out their duties in relation to many of the minor matters which now require his sanction, he should abolish them completely, centralise local government in the Department and have the responsibility fixed there exclusively. At present, the people blame their local authority for not doing this, that and the other thing, whereas, in fact, the local authority is not at fault at all but is hampered in its operations by the inaction of the Department of Local Government and Public Health.

Deputy Dillon referred to the position of children in hospitals. I want to refer to that matter from a different aspect and I think a worse aspect—that is, the question of children in mental hospitals. So far as my knowledge goes, there is no institution in this country primarily designed for the care of children suffering from mental disease. The consequence is that those children have to be kept in the mental hospitals with adults. All the remarks that Deputy Dillon applied to the situation with regard to the ordinary hospital apply with tenfold force to the situation in regard to the mental hospital.

Another question with regard to mental patients which the Minister might well consider is that of more segregation than is permissible at the moment so that the severe cases may be kept more apart from the milder and possibly less dangerous forms than they are at present. Contact of this description has a bad effect on the milder forms. Perhaps some such system could be devised as exists in Northern Ireland. It is possible that if the Northern Ireland system were extended to this country it would be helpful and tend to a greater number of cures than we have at the present moment.

The hospital position generally has been referred to by many speakers. One aspect of it that I would like to mention and one suggestion I would like to make is that the Minister should urge the speeding up of the decision with regard to the position in Dublin in this connection. That question has been talked of for many years. Where the cause of the delay lies I do not know—whether with the hospitals or with the Department. I am particularly interested in this matter of the hospitals because of its bearing on town planning. The site of these hospitals must be a matter of great importance to the consultants who are preparing their town-planning scheme. A number of sites have been suggested some of which are suitable from one point of view and some from another point of view. I do feel that this is a matter that should be speeded forward as quickly as possible so that the town-planning committee may be encouraged in going ahead quickly with their plans.

Like a good many of the Deputies who have already spoken, I also wish to pay a tribute to the Minister for the good things done by his Department and for the work generally of the officials of the Department of Local Government and Public Health. At the same time I have in my county many things to complain of, and I would like if the Minister could see his way to rectify, at as early a stage as possible, what is wrong. My side of the House is denied representation on many important public bodies in the County Meath. They are denied representation on the agricultural committee, on the library committee, and on the hospitals committee. It is only by statute that we were able to secure two members on the board of health. At the present time, with the different schemes that are being put through and with the rates being increased from day to day, I think it is only fair that the farming community, whom we represent in this House, should have some say in the spending of these rates to which they are the principal contributors. I think it is only fair, now that political passions have died out, that the Minister might see that we should get fair representation on those bodies.

How is the Minister to do it?

It is definitely a political ticket and our Party have got no representation on the local bodies——

The Minister has no responsibility. I cannot see how he is responsible for this.

Not on the Estimate.

I think he could get the goodwill of his people down the country. One of the principal things that confront us at the present time is the question of the building of houses. Many building schemes have been put through in the County Meath in the past four or five years and I am not at all satisfied with the way in which they have been carried out. Now that we are embarking on a compulsory scheme in the coming year, I would ask the Minister definitely to keep an eye on Meath. In the case of the schemes carried out in the past few years, I am aware that the foundations of some of the cottages were laid over two years ago but most of the contractors have gone burst, and the cottages are not yet finished. In fact the people building the cottages in Meath now are the shopkeepers and they are going on with the building simply because they want to get some of their own back. Their only hope of doing so is by completing the building of those houses.

I should very definitely say that no one should be allowed to build a cottage or to get a contract for a cottage but some decent well-qualified contractor and he should have some resources behind him. It is not fair to see men without two pence in their pockets, with their bondsmen in the same position, getting contracts for building cottages. They start building and continue until they get the first part of the grant for one house.

With that money they hope to build the second cottage and with the grant for the second cottage they try to complete the first. The whole thing is a laughing-stock. I am satisfied that this should be remedied by insisting on giving contracts only to qualified contractors. The men who got contracts a few years ago built cottages that were a credit to them. The cottages now being built will not last 20 years. The occupiers of these cottages built less than a year or two ago have to provide themselves with buckets and tubs to keep the rain coming down from spilling all through the floors. The people should have decent, healthy homes; otherwise there is the danger of sickness and ill-health owing to the bad condition of these cottages. It is entirely wrong to start with a scheme of 500 or 600 cottages and to advertise then for contractors for the lot. Instead of that, the board of health should take what might be called a five-year plan. I do not like to talk of a five-year plan because of its Russian associations but if the board of health decided on building, say, 200 cottages per year and advertise that number they would get tenders from contractors of some standing and things would run smoothly instead of being in the position they now are.

I do not like to interrupt the Deputy but it appears to me that it is local administration in Meath that the Deputy is criticising.

Well the cause is through not having sufficient supervision over the Meath officials. After all, I think the Minister should see that the money is rightly expended. He is the responsible person.

Is the Deputy a member of the board of health?

I am, and my tongue is heard there as well as here, but I am dealing with wooden heads. One of our most important things after cottage building is a sewerage scheme. This is an important item in our social life. Any large town should have a good sewerage system. We have carried out a good sewerage scheme and a rather expensive one. We put in that sewerage work and then we went around asking 400 or 500 of the residents of the town to connect up, but only 20 residents connected and the scheme is running idle.

That is your own fault.

No, it is the wooden heads again. Before these schemes were embarked on we should have taken a census of the people who were to take in the water, and then we could go on with it. At the present moment the works, after costing from £10,000 to £15,000, are lying idle. That is unfair to the ratepayers, and there are very few ratepayers outside the town getting the benefit. The scheme has mainly been paid for by the farmers, and that, too, is not fair.

But they are only farmers.

A few years ago we were promised that we were to have less officials and more efficiency. At the present moment we find that we have almost doubled our officials. We fired out one secretary because she had not the right pull, and we gave her a pension of £400 a year for life. That lady was fully qualified in every way, and was able to do the work of the board of health in a satisfactory way. We brought in a new secretary then at £400 a year. We were told that he would be paid only £400 a year, but now he is getting 2½ per cent. on every cottage built.

And he was not appointed by the Appointments Commissioners.

He was not. That man is getting £600 or £800 a year, although we were told he was to get only £400. We were told that we were to economise, but instead of saving we are paying £450 to one person to stay at home and have a good old time, while to another person who was to get £400 a year we are paying £700 or £800. In fact, we do not know what we are giving him, because the more cottages that are built the more he will get. When the first secretary was there she had to pay her own staff, but now they can get in any officials they like, both permanent and temporary, to carry on the work there. We have engineers galore, assistant surveyors under the county council, going all over the county, and there is no reason why they should not be engineers to the board of health also. We have two sets of engineers getting big salaries. I quite agree that they are efficient, but I think one set of engineers should cover the two schemes. I am not at all satisfied with anything connected with the board of health in Meath. It started on political lines, and has been going round in a vicious circle ever since—and that is taking place in a county which used to be the premier county in Ireland. Not alone was the Meath County Council a credit to Meath, but a credit to Ireland; at one time it was a credit to the United Kingdom. Now we are in the unfortunate position that to-day we have a chairman who, although in his own way he is a decent man——

Very interesting.

The Minister has nothing whatever to do with the election of the chairman of the Meath County Council.

But he is a decent man.

The Deputy must come down to the Minister's administration.

What I was going to say was that that man never paid a penny rent, rates or taxes. With regard to the collection of cottage rents, I am not at all satisfied that it is carried out satisfactorily. For 25 years there was only one attempt at embezzlement in County Meath, and that involved only a very small amount, but for the last five years we have had five or six attempts at embezzlement each year—in fact we have had one every month. Those people were put there on the political ticket. Some of the unfortunate devils are in Mountjoy, and I am sorry to see them there because it is not their fault; they were never the right type of people.

I hope it is not the Minister's fault.

They are there, and the ratepayers are suffering for it. In one area in my constituency, the Dun-shaughlin area, we took a census of the people who owed cottage rent. We found that in one area 80 people owed from £10 to £18, but there was not one of them interfered with, and that money is still owed to-day. In another area an unfortunate devil happened to fall off a tree; he was not working for his employer at the time, with the result that he never got a penny compensation, and he is paralysed to-day.

That man owed, I think, £4 or £5. He has a wife and eight children. He was thrown out on the side of the road, and was left to die in a shed for four or five days until the parish priest and the local people paid the arrears for him. But those political partisans in Dunshaughlin, who owed £18 and are constantly on the road getting 35/- a week, are not interfered with. They get off, but the other unfortunate devil is thrown out on the road. That is a very grave injustice, and, whether it is the Minister's responsibility or not, I want to let this House know what is going on.

We have down there an item called "cow plots." We have about 15 to 18 of them in different parts of the country. Those were originated for the purpose of giving grazing to the poor man's cow, but it seems that the day has gone when the poor man can put his cow on them, because on 90 per cent. of them we have the graziers' cattle. There is neither supervision nor anything else, and it has been decided that we must get rid of those plots; so I would ask the Minister to make provision as quickly as possible to get them out of our hands. One of them owes £500, another £60, and another £100, and all the time the graziers' cattle are on the land; so in God's name I would ask the Minister to relieve us of that burden, and not to surcharge us with any of those debts, because they are not our fault. Those are a few of the items to which I want to refer. I think what we want is a permanent auditor down at Navan watching the flood of cars with surveyors and engineers going in there at the expense of the ratepayers, and giving us very little service.

What you want down there is a Hitler.

Give me a little power and I will try it, but I think if I had Deputy Corry along with me I would wake them up.

There would be no room for you if I were there.

We would get the lion's share of the spoils.

In connection with cottage building in my county, the ranches are being divided up and most of the people are applying to get cottages on the best part of the land. I think that is a mistake, because when those lands have been divided and new cottages built there will not be any employment. The small uneconomic holders will get the land, and we will have chronic unemployment. In a few years we will have the crows building nests in those cottages. I have already said here that even at the present moment, with a thousand people looking for cottages in County Meath, we cannot get anybody to take one cottage which we built last year and which has a nice plot, although we advertised it four or five times.

Keep that for me.

We tried all over the county and could find nobody who would take it. I would ask the Minister to keep those matters in mind, and when we are embarking on our new scheme, to make sure that although we have one rookery we will not have four or five. I think I will now conclude, because I would be put out if I went too far.

There are a few matters to which I should like to refer on this Vote. In the first place, I wish to give every credit to the Minister for the manner in which he has dealt with housing schemes throughout the country, but I have one grievance, and now is the time to ventilate it. In 1934, representations were made to the Minister in connection with houses in the immediate vicinity of Cork City, which are outside the borough boundary. The people living in this area are people who were unable, for one reason or another, to pay the rent of one room in the slums of Cork. They were evicted out of the room and shifted into these shacks outside. The county medical officer of health, when asked to report on the condition of the houses, stated that he would be afraid to put his dog to sleep in them. The Minister has that report at present. We had to wait until the county board of health was abolished and until we had three separate boards of health set up for the county before we were able to get this scheme through. We did get it through. At that time you could get a fairly good house built for about £300 to £350. Those houses are now costing £460 each. They are situated nearer to Cork City than the houses being built by the Cork Corporation, which are being built outside the borough boundary. I should like the Dáil to bear in mind that those people were evicted because they were unable to pay rents of from 4/- to 5/- a week for one room in the city. That is their financial position. If the board of health now builds houses for them, the economic rent will be between 7/6 and 8/-, owing to this position—that the board of health will get only three-fifths of £300. The Cork Corporation, who built further out than we are going to build these houses, got two-thirds of £400. In plain language, the Cork Corporation got £86 per house more than the board of health got.

We now find the position that, after you might say five years of hard work, getting these schemes prepared, the tenants we put into these houses will be unable to pay the rent. Repeated appeals have been made to the Minister in this matter and I think it is a matter that should engage his attention at once. No legislation is needed to change the conditions; they can be changed by rule. I do not care what statement Deputy Dillon may make, but in my opinion when you have 130 families living in hovels of that kind and when the conditions are such that the people cannot pay any rent for a considerable period, some drastic remedy is called for. When they were summoned before the District Justice to recover arrears of rent, the District Justice went out to see these homes and refused to give a decree for, he said, any landlord who kept houses in that condition should not get rent for them.

That was Judge O'Donnell.

The houses are in such a condition that they would be unable to support a new roof and water is pouring down on the unfortunate occupants. If this country can afford £4,000 or £5,000 for a new gateway for the Phoenix Park, if it can afford to spend thousands of pounds on "fallals" of that description, surely to goodness, where 130 families are living in these conditions, their needs should come first. I would not have brought this matter before the Dáil at all were it not that I have made repeated appeals on the subject. The position at the moment is that unless this matter is rectified now, the scheme will fall through and these unfortunate families will remain in the hovels i have described. I know the Minister has proved himself more than sympathetic in regard to housing for the poor and I am sure it only requires that this matter should be brought before him her to have it rectified. The time has arrived when you cannot continue the farce of pretending to build houses for the poor when the poor cannot pay for them. If you are going to build houses for that particular class of people, they must be built under such conditions that they will be able to pay rent for them. There is very little use in putting a man into a house if you have the board of health having to evict him two or three months afterwards. I cannot imagine any way in which State money could be put to better use than by providing decent dwellings for these people.

I should like to say that in my opinion there are at least 50 per cent. too many inspectors attached to the Local Government Department. Officials over there seem to be cutting across one another—one official doing one job to-day and another official coming along and undoing it to-morrow.

And an inspector for both.

You have two different inspectors going over the one job. Take for instance the case of the little cottage hospital in Middleton. The Local Government Department insisted that the plan of the cottage hospital was not complete unless it provided for the building of a laundry to do the laundry work of the hospital. The plans were sent up here with the necessary provision for the laundry, and were duly sanctioned. After the sanction of the plans, lo and behold, we got a letter down from the Local Government Department again telling us that we were not to carry the matter any further. This was after the laundry had been built, and after the ratepayers money had been spent on it. We were told that the soiled clothes from Midleton should be sent to Cork. If there is anything more ridiculous than that kind of red tape, I do not know what it is.

We have again an instance in which repeated instructions were sent down from the Local Government Department to prepare plans and specifications for different hospitals. In the first place there was a question of a fever hospital for Midleton. Instructions were sent down to South Cork Board of Assistance to prepare plans and specifications for that hospital. The plans and specifications were duly prepared, and after they had been sent up here, another notification came down that the hospital was not to be built at all. The engineer to the Board of Assistance drew his £500 and put it into his pocket for preparing these plans and specifications.

Again, there was a question of plans and specifications for a central hospital in Cork to be built beside the old hospital on Douglas Road. These plans and specifications were prepared on the instructions of the Local Government Department, sent up here to Dublin, sanctioned, and then a notification came down a few months afterwards that we were not to proceed with the scheme. In that case the engineer got another £1,000 and put it into his pocket. As a matter of fact, I think it was £2,000 this time. I think that kind of conduct on the part of officials of the Department is carrying things a little too far. We are dealing with the ratepayers' money. The ratepayers' money is hard-earned money. There are very few of these unfortunate ratepayers who could earn in half a lifetime as much as these officials get for abortive schemes of this kind, and it is time this system ended.

Then we have a third scandal, a case in which an official came down to Cork, picked a site for a hospital, and said: "You are to build it here; buy that site." The city manager came along and bought the site. I do not believe he even consulted the representatives of the city, and £3,000 odd of the ratepayers' money was paid for 20 or 25 acres.

£3,800.

£3,800, on the instructions of an official of the Local Government Department. Another official came down a few months afterwards and said: "I do not like the view from this particular site; we shall have to get another one." He picks one way, and before a start is made to build, about £30,000 has to be spent, because a bridge must be built. It cannot be reached without a bridge, and then, when a start is made, they find that it is a bog, and they have to go down about 40 feet to get a foundation, and to reinforce that.

It would do for an air raid shelter.

These are facts that cannot be denied.

Would it be deep enough to bury the inspectors?

It would be very little harm if some of the inspectors were thrown in there. That is the condition of affairs I find prevailing in the Department, one inspector tripping up another. One man comes down to-day and says, "Do this," and when the ratepayers' money is spent, another inspector comes down and says, "That is wrong, you must do something else."

Is it the inspectors or the architects?

One is as bad as the other. There are too many of them. Hang both of them. It is little wonder with that position prevailing that we have large numbers of ratepayers in the city and county of Cork howling over the amount of rates they have to pay. It is also little wonder that we cannot get a couple of thousand pounds to put the people into decent houses. It is time the position was cured, and, in my opinion, there is only one cure. If that position prevailed in a business establishment, and if an official did what these inspectors have done, he would get a cheque on Saturday night and the road on Monday morning. There would be no bones about it, and no consultation about a pension. What I want to know from the Minister is, which of the inspectors was wrong? Are these inspectors still connected with the Department, and if so, why? We are sick of this kind of humbug. This country is being ruined and ridden by civil servants, who are not even civil. Could any Deputy stand up to justify the expenditure of £1,500 or £2,500 in this way in connection with a hospital that was never built, and, as far as I can find out, there was no intention of building?

The civil servants were not responsible for that.

The responsibility for this Vote is on the Minister.

Then the Minister can explain why one official should select a site for a hospital, on which the ratepayers of Cork had to expend £3,800 of their hard-earned money. We want an explanation of that, and this is the place and the time to get it. I also want to know if we are going to get the money in order that 130 families may be placed in comfortable houses, and taken out of places that the medical officer of health said he would not put a dog to sleep in. Are we going to have someone in charge of the inspectors so that, at least, only one will be sent down every 12 months, and that we will not have one man galloping down to-day, and getting first-class expenses, and a second official coming along later and undoing what the other man did? This is a state of affairs that no one can swallow. Deputy Broderick referred to the position regarding mental hospitals, and the grants given them. I invite Deputies to read the Local Government Act of 1898, by which 50 per cent. of the cost was contributed at a time when patients were only costing 7/8 per head. These patients are now costing 17/- per head, but the mental hospitals are still only receiving the 50 per cent. grant, amounting to 3/10.

With regard to main roads, my opinion is that the unfortunate ratepayers have kept these roads in condition long enough. They had, in the first instance, to build the roads, and as they are now in first-class condition it is time that motorists paid for them. As I understand it, motorists are contributing enough money, between petrol and road taxes, to maintain main roads. As far as farmers are concerned, I suggest they do not use these roads. If they want to take a beast to the market they have to hire a lorry to do so. These roads are practically impassable for farmers who want to use them for their work. The main roads are constantly used by motor-lorries and by motor-cars, and that traffic is paying sufficient money in licence duties and taxes to keep them in order. It is time they were taken off the unfortunate farmers' backs. When he is concluding, I hope the Minister will give a definite reply to the points I have raised.

I am sure there will be general agreement with Deputies who stated that this Department is the one that is most associated with the general life of the country. No other Department has as close touch with the people as that concerned with local government and public health. The work of the Department, to a great extent, is routine, and the added work in connection with housing is a special work in itself. It is on that aspect I wish to make some remarks. I agree with Deputy Corry and other speakers who touched upon the question, that we are over-inspected in every department. No man can do anything without having a host of inspectors about him. Every official is on wheels now, and I wonder how, before the advent of motor-cars, local authorities were supervised at all. This is a very serious matter for this country. Only the few people who are producing can keep a country going. If there are too many drones, and too few workers, there will be no honey in the hive. It is time we gave some attention to that side of the question. The Minister is concerned with many classes of inspectors, with inspectors under the Milk and Dairies Act, Bovine Tuberculosis, and the Dairies and Cowsheds Acts and, as a result, a farmer who is doing mixed farming in the County Dublin, at any rate, is hardly ever without an inspector knocking at the door.

It is time a man was allowed to produce, without being annoyed by an army of inspectors, not all of whom are badly paid, either. It is impossible to have a proper standard of wages for the worker and to produce food at a reasonable cost when there are so many inspectors and inspections, all of whom and all of which must be paid out of the article produced, which all adds to the cost of the article.

Deputy Giles touched on a matter the relevancy of which the Leas-Cheann Comhairle doubted, that is, the building of cottages in Meath. The Minister, of course, has no direct touch with the building of cottages, or the placing of cottage contracts in any board of health area. The Minister insists, and, on the broad principle, rightfully insists, that the lowest tenderer should get the contract. On the broad principle, nobody can cavil at that, but it should be subject to the qualification that the contractor is able to do the job. I suggest that there should be a black list of contractors and that when a man fails in doing a job, his tender will not be considered in future, and, where it is a matter of inviting certain contractors to tender by letter, that he be passed over and not so invited. An important reason for that is the trouble and disappointment occassioned when a contractor fails in his contract. He not only disappoints the local authority who placed the contract with him, but he brings down the merchant, the builder's provider, as well, with the result that when the provider, who normally gives credit to the honest, enterprising contractors, gets a few stabs from bad contractors, he will hesitate to give credit to others who might be all right if they got the chance. Consequently, the number of contractors will become less and we might finally reach a stage at which only the very big contractors would contract for a job and the chances of placing a contract at a reasonable price would then depend on whether the big contractors were short of work or not.

In the matter of contracts, the Minister should not be too rigid, or at least, if a case is put to him by a local authority, he should consider it. We, in County Dublin, have had great trouble in this respect and while we unanimously stand for the lowest tenderer getting the job, we also stand for considering the type of man who may be the lowest tenderer. If I were in the Minister's place. I could not say that I could do anything more than consider the type of contractor who sends in the lowest tender and ask myself if the man has sufficient resources to carry out the work according to schedule.

The Lord Mayor of Cork, Deputy Hickey, and others have advocated the scattering of cottages, so to speak, over wider areas. It is good to give the Minister on occasions such as these the local viewpoints on these matters. I will give mine, and I think it is the unanimous opinion of the County Dublin Board of Health. If we have one trouble in County Dublin, it is the provision of water for cottages by means of pumps. It becomes an uneconomic proposition to sink pumps for one or a few cottages and we find, consequently, that the only way of attending to sanitation, or providing a decent water supply and general modern arrangements in cottages, is to keep the cottages together. Even if we have to sink a pump or two, we are prepared to go any distance to connect with a water supply which will be under the direct control of the county medical officer of health. The job of laying a pipe one mile or two miles, if you have 30 or 40 cottages in a colony, is comparatively negligible per cottage, and if you are near a running stream or a sewer, you can provide full sanitary accommodation for these cottages. While I have no doubt that the Deputies who spoke for their respective areas had good reason for speaking as they did, if the Minister should consider the point and adopt a uniform policy or exert his influence in respect of a uniform policy, as suggested by them, it would not fit in with the wishes of County Dublin and would not tally with our practical experience there.

The question of hospitals in County Dublin is also a burning question. An area has been chosen provisionally for sites in Lucan district, and I think the same thing has happened there. The Dublin City Manager was the party concerned. We, the council, have to find the money, but that is not a matter I am going to raise here. He would not have done it, if the law had not invested him with the power to do it, so that this is not the time to raise that matter. What the public are concerned with, and what I want to put before the Minister now, is the need for more expedition. Let us have those hospitals. We have heard a lot about them. We have heard of trips to foreign lands in connection with them, but what we want is expedition. We want to see those hospitals.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again to-morrow.
The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Friday, 31st March, 1939.
Top
Share