Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 24 Jun 1941

Vol. 84 No. 1

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Newbridge Waterworks Employee.

asked the Minister for Local Government and Public Health whether he received a proposal from the County Kildare Board of Health to increase the wages of Mr. P. Dempsey, who is employed at the Waterworks, Newbridge; if he will state the date upon which the first proposals were received, and what is the cause of the delay in authorising the increase proposed by the board.

The person referred to by the Deputy was appointed caretaker of the pumping plant in 1936. In 1938 the board of health proposed an increase of 10/- a week in his remuneration. The maintenance charges of the Newbridge water and sewerage services are very high. There has been excessive consumption of water in the town due apparently to leakages. The claim for extra remuneration was apparently due to extra time occupied on pumping water each day. It is the duty of another employee of the board to supervise the distribution system. Until there is evidence of suitable action being taken by the board to curtail the considerable waste of water and reduce the high maintenance costs the proposal to increase the reimuneration of the caretaker of the pumping plant cannot be considered.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that this matter has been under consideration by the Department for three years; that I was promised constantly by the Department that an inspector would be sent down to Newbridge to inquire into this man's duties, and into whatever difficulties have arisen, but notwithstanding frequent promises no inspector has, in fact, gone there after three years, which is a scandalous delay, even for the Department of Local Government? Will the Parliamentary Secretary now take some steps to have the matter inquired into by an officer from his Department?

I am not aware that the position is as stated. I might remind the Deputy that this man was appointed in 1936, and applied for an increase of wages in 1938, two years after being appointed.

The man has to work seven days week.

He has, but he has two or three other men to help him.

That is not true. In-view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I desire to give notice that I propose to raise this matter on the adjournment.

Top
Share