Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 29 May 1945

Vol. 97 No. 11

Committee on Finance. - Vote 41—Local Government and Public Health.

I move:—

That a sum not exceeding £1,266,429 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending the 31st day of March, 1946, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Local Government and Public Health, and certain Services administered by that office, including Grants and other Expenses in connection with Housing, Grants to Local Authorities, sundry Miscellaneous Grants and Grants-in-Aid, and certain charges connected with Hospitals.

It has been the practice hitherto to embrace in one discussion both the Local Government and Public Health sides of my Department. If the progress of business through the House had been what I might describe as normal, it was my intention to propose that, with the leave of the House, these two sides might be discussed separately this year, one of them, the Local Government side, being taken on the main Estimate, that is, on the Vote which we are now discussing, and the other, Public Health and associated matters, being taken on one of the other departmental Votes, say, on Vote 42, which is the Vote for the Office of the Registrar-General.

I suppose I may say, perhaps in anticipation of the discussion on next year's Estimate, that it would seem to me that that particular office which is responsible for the compilation of the vital statistics, as the statistics relating to births, deaths and marriages are commonly called, would not be an inappropriate Vote upon which to discuss matters so closely related to these as the problems of public health, medical services, hospitals, public assistance and so on. I would have proposed, Sir, in view of the agreement which I understand has been reached as to the total amount of time which might be occupied in the discussion of my Votes, that we should allocate, say, approximately, half of the time to the discussion of local government problems, and the remaining half to the discussion of public health matters. It would appear, however, that that proposal, for reasons which will be apparent to the House, is not a practicable one to make to-day, and therefore, I presume that we will discuss both the local government side and the public health side of the Department as we have hitherto been accustomed to do.

Accordingly, I will begin by informing the House that the collection of revenue by county councils during the last financial year showed an improvement on the preceding year, which is a matter upon which we may congratulate not only the county councils but ourselves, as it indicates that the economic progress of the country as a whole has been well maintained. The total county rate warrant for the year ending March last was about £4? millions, including arrears of £169,000 which had been carried forward from the preceding year. Over 90 per cent. of the total amount was collected within the year as compared with 89 per cent. during the year ending March, 1944. The satisfactoriness of the collection varied over the different counties. In several counties it is gratifying to note that the collections exceeded 97 per cent. The rates outstanding on the 31st March, 1945, amounted to £500,000, which is less than one-half of the amount outstanding three years ago. Naturally, in consequence of the satisfactory collection, the financial position of the local authorities has been greatly strengthened, and has been further improved by the recovery of arrears of annuities which has resulted in the repayment by the Land Purchase Guarantee Fund of local taxation grants which had been absorbed in the Fund to meet land annuity arrears. I should mention that, in the past three years, the total amounts of grants repaid by the Fund and issued to local bodies were £242,890 in 1943, £214,254 in 1944 and £84,169 in 1945. The House will, of course, appreciate that as the pool of arrears diminishes the amount which falls to be released to the local authorities from the Guarantee Fund will naturally tend to diminish correspondingly.

In framing the Estimates for local services in the present year I am glad to say that the local bodies, with one regrettable exception, have recognised their responsibilities and made reasonable provision for the maintenance of their local services. The exception is the Kerry County Council. For several years prior to 1944, proper provision had not been made by that body for road maintenance, despite the repeated representations made to the county council by my Department. As a consequence of this, the condition of the roads in Kerry deteriorated very considerably. Last year the county council after, again, repeated remonstrances on my part, and, indeed, after I had to resort to a threat to abolish the county council, decided to increase the provision for the maintenance of the roads, and increased the rate by 3/8 in the £. When, however, the road estimate for the present year was laid before them at a meeting on the 18th January last, the council refused even to consider it, on the plea that they desired that a special engineer should be appointed to make an inspection of the roads in order to ascertain if value was being obtained for the money spent on them.

The Council also wanted a sworn inquiry into road administration in the county. It was pointed out to the council that no reason had been advanced for the holding of a sworn inquiry which, as the House is aware is always, from the point of view of a local authority, a very expensive matter, and that while it was open to them to have an investigation by a special engineer on road expenditure, the road estimate for 1945-46, prepared by the newly appointed county engineer, should, therefore, be first considered, so that provision for this service would be included in the rates for the present year.

A further meeting of the council was held on February 8th for consideration of the road estimate, as a decision would facilitate the preparation of the rate books. At that meeting the deputy county manager advised the council that there was little time to prepare the estimate, but again the council resolved to defer the consideration of the county manager's proposal pending an investigation into road expenditure. There was no reason at all why they should not consider the proposal in detail, and adopt an estimate which would be adequate to provide for the service, or why such an investigation as the council seemed to want should not be undertaken in the ordinary course of the year. However, the majority refused on the second occasion, even to consider the estimate. In accordance with law I fixed 19th February, 1945, as the date on which the council should meet to consider the road estimate for the year.

A meeting of the council was duly held on that date, at which a resolution was adopted in the following form:

"That we do not strike the rate proposed until the inquiry asked for be held".

An amendment, that the road estimate submitted be considered, was defeated by 11 votes to nine. Before taking that decision, the council had previously been warned by the deputy county manager that they were bound by law to make provision for the coming year, and that refusal to consider the rate estimate would be a failure to discharge their duty. Consequent upon the county council even refusing to consider the road estimate, I ordered a sworn inquiry to be held. Let me remind the House that that was the duty of the local authority, which controls the purse, to consider the estimate submitted to them by the county manager. If after discussion with the county manager they found that deductions could be made within reason, and if the manager was satisfied that the deductions would not interfere unduly with the proper provision made for the local services, they could reduce the estimate and could strike a rate which would be sufficient to provide for the reduced estimate. But Kerry County Council took up the attitude that they were not even prepared to consider the estimate submitted to them by the county manager.

Following this action of the county council I directed, as I have said, a local inquiry to be held into the performance of their duties. At this inquiry the members of the county council tried to justify their attitude on the ground that they were not satisfied that the ratepayers were getting value for the amount expended on the roads, that the roads were being used by outside traffic that they were not intended for, and that they were destroyed by traffic consisting of turf and beet going out of the county. In short, the case was put up that the people of Kerry were paying for roads that they were not damaging. That contention is puerile, and entirely ignores the fact that the people of Kerry live by the production and sale of turf, beet and wheat which are sold in all parts of the country, and that the income derived from the sale of these products reaches a very substantial figure. For instance, the expenditure on wages of workers employed by the county council of Kerry, all Kerrymen, and, therefore, Kerry ratepayers, from the production of turf sent to other parts of the country amounted to £570,000. In addition, the quantity of turf produced by farmers and other private producers in Kerry and sent to other parts of the country realised approximately £800,000.

No person of intelligence could seriously contend that Kerry did not benefit from turf production, and as regards wheat and beet it is only infantile to suggest that the producers of these commodities for sale should not have to bear the reasonable cost of transporting them outside the county. Do they expect wheat consumers and sugar consumers in other parts of the country to make an annual pilgrimage in order to consume Kerry wheat and Kerry beet?

Everybody knows that considerable advantages must have accrued to the farmers and workers of Kerry in the production of these commodities. No weaker ground could have been advanced by responsible public men—it is scarcely reasonable to describe them as responsible—for refusing to discharge their public responsibilities. As far as the members of Kerry County Council are concerned, in view of the condition of many of the roads of the county, and the effect on road transport, it should be made clear to them that the maintenance of the roads is vital to the life and economy of the Kerry people. For the present condition of the Kerry roads the county council is entirely responsible. The provision for main roads was reduced from £42,000 in 1938-39 to £2,000 in 1943-44, while the provision for road maintenance was reduced from £46,700 to £28,400. These reductions, let me emphasise, were effected despite representations from my Department, and the effect of such a policy will inevitably result in placing a much heavier burden on the ratepayers at a later period in order to restore the roads to a normal condition. The council expected to force a larger road grant than I had allocated. In that they failed.

I should point out that in the present year the increased rate necessary for roads is due not to increased maintenance of roads mainly carrying turf and other traffic, but for road maintenance generally. The total rate estimate shows a decrease as compared with previous years. The difference in the rates between the two years arose from the fact that the council in the previous year borrowed £35,000, instead of making provision for that out of revenue, and in the present year, in addition to the extra sum necessary for road maintenance, provision has to be made for repayment of an instalment of the loan. I treated Kerry County Council last year with very great consideration. I treated them, in my view, with no less consideration this year, to assist them to put road maintenance on a proper basis, but the attitude they adopted in connection with the estimate for the present year convinced me that no reliance could be placed upon them to improve administration.

It is absolutely essential to ensure that the economic life of the people of Kerry will not suffer from a defective road system. It is equally important to ensure that a county council entrusted with such important functions will discharge them properly and, where that is not likely to be done, I have no option but to relieve them of their public responsibilities and to transfer those responsibilities to a commissioner who will see that the services are fully maintained. That has now been done. Some reduction has been made in the road estimate proposed, and I think that the people of Kerry are substantially the gainers by my action.

With regard to the road position in general, I think we can say that, despite the difficulties arising from a shortage of certain materials, it has been well maintained. Most of the main roads are constructed in waterbound macadam, surface dressed. Roads of this type of construction require regular surface dressing to keep them waterproof. Owing to the scarcity of tar, it has not been possible to do this. They have, however, been preserved, as far as possible, by rolling. The expenditure by local authorities on surface dressing of roads varied between £200,000 and £350,000 per annum. About 7,800 miles of roads require surface treatment, and this will be one of the principal works which must be undertaken when tar and bitumen again become available. The cost will, probably, amount to about £2,000,000 and the period required to complete the work will be from three to four years.

In the Estimate, a sum of £62,000 is provided for the construction of roads and drains in connection with bog development works. This provision is somewhat less than that of previous years. That is due to the fact that greater expenditure was necessary on important works when new bogs were first being opened. In the present year, turf production by county councils is being continued. There were 16,000 workers employed on the bogs at the end of April and the target we are aiming at for Fuel Importers, Limited, is 400,000 tons. In this connection, I might say that over 2,000,000 tons of turf were produced by the county councils up to the end of the 1944 season. Of that amount, 1,250,000 tons were disposed of to Fuel Importers Ltd., 200,000 tons to other purchasers and 400,000 tons were retained by the producers for their own use. About 160,000 tons of the total turf production now remain to be disposed of. The total expenditure by county councils on financing turf production up to 31st March last was £4,641,424. The receipts against this amounted to £3,908,462 and the balance of £732,962 will be dealt with in the transactions of the present year.

With regard to housing operations undertaken by the local bodies, these, in the past year, were practically confined to the City of Dublin. Seven hundred and ninety-seven dwellings were completed by the corporation, and 618 of these are single family dwellings erected in the districts of Crumlin and Cabra. The balance consisted of 179 dwellings provided in reconditioned houses. Further schemes at present in progress in the Crumlin and Cabra areas provide for the erection of over 1,000 additional dwellings. Outside Dublin, housing activity was very slack. Only 185 houses were completed during the year by six urban authorities. There was a limited amount of building by private persons with the aid of grants. The total number of new houses erected under this head was 267. The number reconstructed with the aid of grants was 300. In rural areas, 102 labourers' cottages were built in seven counties.

More widespread and greater activity in housing, I am glad to say, may be anticipated in the present year, and it may be of some interest if I give a general picture of the housing problem as ascertained by recent surveys throughout the country. In the years since the emergency began, much useful work was accomplished in housing. There were difficulties and delays, of course, in obtaining materials, and there were rising costs to contend with, but, nevertheless, the local bodies succeeded in providing for 11,000 houses. As regards future housing operations, it is estimated that 43,000 new dwellings will be required in urban areas. The total number of houses provided by urban authorities is, approximately, 50,000, of which 31,000 have been provided since 1932, over 20,000 of these being provided prior to the outbreak of the emergency in 1939. Of the total number of new houses required, the requirements of Dublin City represent, approximately, one half, while the estimated requirements of the four county boroughs and the Borough of Dun Laoghaire constitute 70 per cent. of the total requirements of new urban housing. Of the remainder of the urban areas, housing needs are greatest, with one exception, in towns with populations of over 10,000. In those areas, the needs range from 872 to 418. In urban areas of lesser population, the number of new houses required is relatively small. In Cork Borough, almost 4,000 additional new houses will require to be erected, and the corporation there have secured sites comprising 170 acres. In Limerick County Borough, about 2,000 houses will be required. A scheme of 42 new houses is about to be undertaken, while proposals for the building of 1,793 further houses are receiving consideration by the corporation. In Waterford County Borough, 987 houses are required, and the corporation are making arrangements there to proceed with schemes to liquidate that requirement.

As regards rural housing, the estimated needs are 16,000 houses. An apportionment of the needs of the several counties shows that 8,021 cottages are required in Leinster, 5,524 in Munster, 775 in Connacht, and 1,801 in Ulster. When local authorities were invited to undertake the housing surveys upon which the figures that I have given the House are based, they were also urged to carry out preliminary works in respect of schemes to be put in operation immediately materials become generally available. Land, accordingly, has already been acquired and plans approved in respect of 7,802 houses. Included in that number are 5,356 dwellings in Dublin City, 42 in Limerick City, 577 in other urban areas, and 1,827 in rural areas.

Further schemes for 1,358 houses are in an advanced stage of preparation. Of these, 1,327 are in urban areas other than the county boroughs, and 21 in rural areas. The schemes already approved will enable the first year's programme to be started as soon as conditions are favourable. The scale of building may be somewhat restricted at first but an increasing rate of progress will be made, according as materials are in full supply.

It is customary in dealing with the annual Estimates to review the latest statistics of births, deaths and marriages in the country. The statistics available for 1944 are as yet only provisional, but nevertheless they represent a fair picture of the position. The number of births in 1944 was slightly in excess of the number for the year 1943, and not far below the number for the year 1942, which was remarkable for a large increase in births, the number being 9,337 over the figure for the year 1941. The total number of births in 1942 was 66,117, in 1943, 64,275, and in 1944, 64,756. The decrease since the peak year is small and it looks as if a higher birth rate is likely to be maintained.

In 1944 the number of marriages was 16,875, being 453 fewer than in the previous year. The marriage rates for the years 1942, 1943 and 1944 have been the highest since 1864, when registration of marriages began in this country.

In 1944, the total number of deaths was 45,147, being an increase of 1,653 over the number of deaths in 1943. The detailed statistics are not yet available to indicate the various causes of the increase, but so far as they are available the increase was not due to mortality from infectious diseases. The death rate is naturally affected by many causes and, therefore, fluctuates within fairly wide limits. It is gratifying to note that, so far as infant mortality is concerned, the death rate in rural parts of the country is low. In the year 1943, for which full statistics are available, the mortality rates for urban and rural areas per 1,000 births were 110 and 67, respectively. The total number of infant deaths in 1944 was somewhat less than in 1943.

As regards the principal infectious diseases, namely, typhus, typhoid, diphtheria, scarlet fever and puerperal sepsis, there was a fall in the aggregate incidence in 1944 as compared with 1943. The position would have been much more favourable were it not for a further rise in the prevalence of diphtheria. The total notifications for all these diseases during 1944 amounted to 7,156, of which 5,086 or, approximately, 71 per cent., were in respect of diphtheria. Notifications of typhus fell from 20 to nine, of scarlet fever from 2,256 to 1,538, and of puerperal sepsis from 80 to 70. With regard to the increase in the incidence of diphtheria, I should like to refer the House to a statement made in a recent report by the Medical Superintendent of Health for Cork City, who said that after 15 years' experience of immunisation, during which 23,000 children were immunised, there has not been a single death from diphtheria amongst these children. His report stresses the fact that despite the success which has thus been achieved a great many people will not avail of the services placed at their disposal for the protection of their children, until faced with an acute emergency, and even under such circumstances a large proportion will still not take the trouble to have their children safeguarded. My Department continues to urge on local bodies the need for continuance of efforts to induce parents and guardians to avail of the schemes for the free immunisation of their children against the dangers of diphtheria.

The number of deaths from measles, which many people continue to regard as a harmless and more or less normal children's disease, but which nevertheless, has its toll of fatalities, may be noted. However, in the year 1943, the number of deaths from measles was 32, the lowest record ever attained in respect of this disease. In 1944 the number of cases showed a sharp increase to 7,835, and the mortality rose to 133, the highest number since 1936. The mortality from this disease, accordingly, moves in cycles, gradually attaining a peak in a particular year and then sharply declining to a low figure. The disease of whooping cough also moves in cycles but to a lesser degree than measles. The number of cases notified in 1944 was 2,465, which gives a somewhat heavier incidence than in 1943, the number of deaths was 240, being 70 less than the number in 1943.

The Estimate makes provision here this year on the same basis as the previous year for the supply of assistance in kind, amounting to £170,000, to the recipients of home assistance, and for payments amounting to £230,000 towards provision of supplementary allowances to certain old age pensioners, to certain blind pensioners and their dependent children, and to certain recipients of disablement benefit under the National Health Insurance Acts, and their dependent children. The provision for the supply of fuel under approved schemes for necessitous families has been increased from £100,000 to £115,000, while the grants towards the supply of footwear for necessitous children have been increased from £20,000 to £30,000.

I do not think it is necessary for me to go into any detail as regards these grants. The House is fully aware of the amounts of the grants and the way in which they are administered, and how people can go about securing the advantages to be derived from them. It is not necessary, either, to go into any detail as regards other public health grants except the provision for the treatment of tuberculosis, which has been increased from £205,000 to £217,750. The special measures to deal with tuberculosis were recently discussed when the Tuberculosis (Establishment of Sanatoria) Bill was before the House. Since the Bill became law, I have set up a special section in my Department to prepare plans and other contract documents for the establishment of three regional sanatoria at Dublin, Cork, and Galway. For the Dublin regional sanatorium of 1,000 beds, I may mention that a site has been selected at Santry and that for the regional institution to be provided in Galway a site has been selected about one mile from the borough boundary. For the Cork regional sanatorium, a site has not been finally determined but no difficulty in obtaining a suitable one is anticipated. The existing tuberculosis services, I may say, are being actively carried on by the local officers of the local authorities and expanded wherever possible. A refresher course in the methods of treatment of tuberculosis was organised by my Department towards the end of last year. The course lasted two weeks and the arrangements were kept open for a period of 14 weeks. Every county medical officer of health and tuberculosis officer had an opportunity of familiarising himself with the most modern methods of treatment of tuberculosis and the most modern methods in use for diagnosis, case-finding and sputum examination. Additional x-ray and other equipment are being obtained but delivery may be delayed for some months.

The House will be glad to learn that there was a decline in the mortality from tuberculosis in 1944. The total number of deaths was 3,758 as against 4,306 for 1943. The special welfare scheme for tuberculous patients undergoing treatment which was introduced two years ago has been of great benefit. Local authorities, regrettably enough, were somewhat slow in making satisfactory arrangements for the provision of extra nourishment in the form of eggs, butter and milk and it was necessary to address them again on the matter and to urge that assistance in this form should be given as fully as possible.

As regards the provision of additional institutional accommodation, the projects which are at present being carried out will result in about 300 additional beds being available. About 90 of them are being provided in Dublin, 84 in Galway and about 55 in Monaghan. In addition 31 extra beds have recently been provided at Beaumont and a further extension is to be undertaken.

Last year local authorities were invited to review the scales of salaries for nursing staffs. In a circular letter which was issued by my Department in November last improved cash scales were recommended and also a scaling up of the valuation of emoluments. The majority of local authorities have already adopted a scale of £75 a year rising by annual increments of £5 to £90 a year with an additional increment of £5 when a nurse has been three years on £90 and a further and final increment of £5 when she has been four years on £95, subject, of course, to satisfactory service being given. This scale represents cash payment and is independent of the usual emoluments in respect of board and residence.

The number of persons in receipt of all forms of public assistance from 1944 shows a reduction as compared with the year 1943. There was, however, a slight increase in the numbers assisted during the months of January and February of this year. The cost of relief continues to show an upward trend. This is due to the adoption of a higher standard of home assistance and to an increase in the cost of institutional assistance due to higher expenditure on maintenance and upkeep. The numbers of patients in mental hospitals have shown a downward tendency since 1940. Up to the present year there has been a reduction of approximately 1,600 persons.

The work of the public assistance authorities was on the whole carried out in a satisfactory manner during the year. There was a number of cases involving disciplinary action but the majority of them related to charges of dereliction of duty against minor officers. During 1944 the Hospital Libraries Council registered four new hospitals under the scheme by which books are supplied to patients. This brings the total number of hospitals, including tuberculosis sanatoria, now registered with the council, up to 84. These, Sir, are the principal matters in which I thought Deputies might be interested.

I understand that the time for the discussion on this Vote, in accordance with the general regulations, has been limited this year. In mentioning at the opening of his statement that were it not for this limitation in time he had intended to have a separate discussion on each branch of his Department, the Minister did not say whether we might assume that his Department now functions in more or less separate divisions—one for Public Health and one for the various other activities of Local Government. I assume that, subject to the authority of the Minister as Minister for Local Government, Public Health is now administered separately since the Order of last year. That would mean that from now on we shall have a separate discussion on each Department.

It was hoped to have a separate discussion this year, but other Votes went through with so much expedition that I am unable to recommend that course now.

On the whole the Minister's review is satisfactory so far as the general conditions of public health are concerned. Recently, we had a very full discussion on tuberculosis and little advantage would be derived now from a similar discussion on the treatment and incidence of that disease. The one fact that strikes me is that housing in the country must have an important effect on the incidence of tuberculosis. While we cannot expect a very large increase in new houses in the coming year, I am anxious to know from the Minister if his Department can give any estimate of the extent to which they hope to deal with the housing problem between now and this time next year or if they can give any indication as to the availability of necessary supplies of building materials. One is struck when travelling through the country by the differences in various counties so far as housing accommodation is concerned. Certain counties appear to have made better provision for houses, particularly for cottages, than others. It is also significant that counties which make most provision for housing have kept their roads in a better state of repair than those which have not been so active in providing houses. These latter counties also make less provision for the upkeep of main and by-roads. I assume that the general prosperity of a county is reflected in the housing position and also in the road position.

On the question of the erection of houses for the coming year, I wonder could the Minister indicate in his reply what prospects there are of building materials being available? I am aware, of course, that the question of the provision of building materials is more a matter for the Department of Industry and Commerce, but certain local authorities have in the past made far better provision than others in this respect. One or two local authorities or areas under the jurisdiction of local authorities which come within my constituency did not make any great provision for housing in the past, and the need for houses or cottages in these areas is far greater than, say, in the city.

Unless steps are taken in the near future to carry out urgent repairs, even houses that are in existence at the moment will absolutely fall down. The local authorities are not anxious to carry out any repairs, because the houses are under a demolition order, and it is proposed to initiate extensive new building schemes when materials can be procured. I should like some indication from the Minister as to the general position in regard to the availability of materials.

Concerning the position of main roads it strikes one driving through the country, particularly those of us who have to rely on humble means of conveyance—the Minister may not experience the same effect travelling in a large car—that the main roads are at last showing very definite signs of wear. It is significant that in certain counties wear is far more apparent than in others. I am not certain as to whether, under the scheme which the Parliamentary Secretary envisages, these roads will be scrapped or whether the Government intends to repair them. Unless proper materials become available in the near future, the existing surfaces will not last much longer. That is a matter of concern to motorists, not only because the bad condition of the road results in jolting and bumping, but because it is also detrimental to the tyres. The Minister, in dealing with this subject, mentioned that it was proposed to spend approximately £2,000,000 on road reconstruction. Again, he did not give any indication as to the prospects of getting the necessary materials in the coming year. I assume that the Government will soon make some effort to secure essential materials for the upkeep of these roads, or for the reconstruction of new types of roads. I assume that this country will have to take its place in a queue, and will have to take whatever materials are available, but the road situation must, in the very near future, be a matter for serious consideration by the Department of Local Government and the local authorities.

I wish to refer to turf production. I have given up attempting to ascertain the actual cost of turf. While that also is a matter for another Department, I should like the Minister to induce, and if he cannot induce, to compel local authorities to make proper roads into bogs. In South County Dublin there are two very large bog areas. In addition to the county council, numerous private producers trek out daily to the bogs. Some of them spend their holidays cutting turf. They have difficulty in getting to the bogs, and when they get the turf on to the side of the bog the roads are inadequate and entirely unsuitable for any form of heavy transport for the removal of the turf from the bog.

If a private producer has gone to the inconvenience and expense of producing turf for his own household, and, possibly, in conjunction with his neighbours, for a number of households, provision should be made for the transport of the turf from the bog to their homes. While I know the petrol position and transport position are not as satisfactory as one would like, the roads are in such a deplorable state that anyone who has a lorry available for the work finds it extremely difficult to remove the turf. If the county council are approached in the matter they refuse to make provision. It may be that it would involve additional staff. But I think these private producers, who represent a very considerable section of the community, should be facilitated, if not to the extent of the provision of transport, at any rate to the extent that the roadways to the bogs and into the bogs should be improved, so that the people who are in a position to supply transport would be free from the fear of damage either to tyres or vehicles used for the purpose of transporting turf.

The Minister, in introducing the Estimate, devoted a considerable part of his speech to a concentrated attack on the elected representatives of County Kerry. I do not know why the Minister should single out County Kerry in this way. I do not wish to deal with the matter exhaustively, but I think it will be generally admitted that the abolition of the Kerry County Council was just a move in the grand strategy of Party politics. The Government did not want a local election in County Kerry, and therefore, just as the wolf decided to pick a quarrel with the lamb, the Minister decided to pick a quarrel with the Kerry County Council and to destroy them. The facts, as disclosed by the Minister, in connection with Kerry, seem to raise the question as to whether the Minister's action can be justified or not. Kerry County Council felt that there was something wrong with road administration in their county. They demanded an inquiry. That is all they asked for, and I think it was a fair and reasonable demand. Perhaps the method by which they sought to enforce that demand was not the best method. It was not a method which would recommend itself to me, but it was certainly the only method they considered feasible.

In many cases where farmers find that roads leading to their particular townland or district are not being properly maintained, they combine and they say, "We will not pay rates until our roads are put into a proper state of repair." It is an emphatic protest, an emphatic way of drawing attention to a grievance, but it is not a way of which I would approve. I do not think that Kerry County Council acted wisely in adopting the line of refusing to carry out their functions until they got their demands, but I think the Minister must admit—I think the House will certainly admit—that the demand put forward was a very reasonable one. I would ask the Minister to let us know, when replying, how the rates in Kerry over a number of years compare with a number of other counties, how the road rate in Kerry compares with the road rate in other counties, and if he is satisfied that administration there has been satisfactory. I believe that the county services in Kerry are costing relatively too much in comparison with other counties. That is apparent from the high level of rates. Anyhow, the Minister was anxious to avoid an election in Kerry.

As far as the rates are concerned, the one outstanding feature is that in all counties they appear to be steadily rising. That is a matter which ought to concern this House. We ought to realise that there is a vast number of local services of such tremendous importance to our people that they require to be developed and perhaps extended. The question naturally arises: how are we to extend those services without placing an undue burden upon the ratepayers? It must be admitted first of all that, unlike general taxation, the local rates are not equitably distributed over all sections of the people. For that reason, certain sections find themselves very much aggrieved. On this Estimate, we cannot alter that situation, but we must certainly take note of it. People who own property, and particularly people who own land, find that the direct charge which they are compelled to pay is very much higher in proportion to their incomes than that which people in receipt of incomes from other sources have to bear.

A circular has been issued by the Minister's Department which seeks to prove that the locally elected representatives of the people have very wide powers even under the County Managerial Act, but when that circular is considered it will be found that the only power which local authorities really possess is the power to suspend the manager. That seems to me to be a very futile proceeding, because I am sure it would be found that, if any local authority were to suspend the manager, the Minister would come along very quickly and reinstate him. As far as power over the purse is concerned, the local authorities definitely have power to increase the estimates. They have power to order the county manager to incur more expenditure than he may be inclined to embark upon. They have power to introduce, new schemes—new housing schemes, land or site development or sewerage schemes—and compel the manager to adopt them. But when it comes to reducing expenditure, the powers of the local authorities are very limited. If the manager wants to spend a certain sum, he will spend it no matter what the local representatives may say. That means that the representatives of the ratepayers on the local authorities have power to increase their rates, but, practically speaking, no power to reduce them. They have power to make one appointment—the appointment of the rate collector. Personally, I should like to see that power taken away. Having taken so much power from the local authorities, it does not serve a very useful purpose to give the locally elected representatives power to appoint the tax-gatherer—the occupant of the most unpopular position in the service.

I feel, and have felt since the County Management Act was passed, that interest in local affairs will tend to decrease. It will be found more and more difficult to get the best type of individual to represent the people on the local bodies, and it will be difficult to get them, when elected, to attend. Notwithstanding that, I, as a member of a local authority, have endeavoured to make the Act work as well as possible. My experience on the county council of which I am a member is that very little work is laid before the county councils. Very often there are only the minutes of the last meeting, possibly a small matter which requires a resolution, and probably half a dozen snowball resolutions from other counties. That constitutes the business at a county council meeting. Since the county council has power to supervise the county manager, and since it has power to suspend him, in theory at any rate, I was anxious that they should have an opportunity of reviewing his work as fully as possible, so I got a motion passed by the Carlow County Council to the effect that the orders of the county manager would be circulated to every member of the council, and that the first business of each county council meeting should be to consider those orders. If they disapproved of them they could express disapproval, or, if there was any matter in the list of orders that called for comment, the council would have power to deal with it. I felt that that was contributing in some way towards the success of the Managerial Act.

I am definitely opposed to that Act, but my approach to every question is to try to make the best of the position in which we find ourselves. Therefore, I was anxious to make the best of the Managerial Act, and I think it will be found that it has been useful to have a discussion at the county council meeting upon the work which the county manager had carried out during the month or six weeks since the previous meeting. Whatever we may say about rates or the readjustment of the burden on the ratepayers, there is no doubt whatever that there is a tremendous amount of work to be done by local authorities in the immediate future. The housing problem has got into arrears, and the whole question of road construction and maintenance has got heavily into arrears. I am anxious to know what plans the Minister has to help the county councils to cope with those two big questions. I think the county councils and the local authorities generally would require fairly substantial borrowing powers in order to deal with road construction and maintenance. At present, I think they are confined to five-year loans, and, in the abnormal period which we are facing, I think that is hardly sufficient. A well-made road should have a life of much more than five years. I think a road surface with a life of only five years is an exceptionally bad job. I think that, with modern methods of resurfacing, a road should be guaranteed to last for a very considerable period.

There has always been a difficulty created for local authorities with regard to the question of road surfacing by the rival claims of the horse-drawn and the motor vehicle. I admit that it is a very difficult problem because, while the ideal system would be to provide a margin at each side of the road for the horse-drawn vehicle, that would involve a very considerable amount of expenditure. The difficulty might be got over by widening the road, but it would also involve, perhaps, a not so satisfactory surface. It is always difficult to provide a satisfactory untarred surface at the sides of the roads. Anyone who has experience of road construction knows that, if you steamroll and resurface a portion of the road without tarring it, it will tend very quickly to deteriorate. There is also the fact that, when the tarred surface becomes softened with the heat of the sun, the effect of the traffic is to cause an unevenness of the surface as between the untarred and the tarred portion. I wonder has anything been done to discover a tar-bound surface or other permanent surface that will be suitable both for horse-drawn and motor vehicles? If that problem can be solved it will make the task both of county councils and road surveyors much easier.

There is no doubt that a big and far-reaching building scheme will have to be put into operation as soon as materials are available. It would seem to me that, while we have here some of the basic materials for building in the way of sand, cement, tiles, asbestos slates and other roofing material, we find that timber will be a big problem. I think that the Minister's Department should by now have discovered, or at least have made very exhaustive attempts to discover, a substitute which would eliminate to some extent the use of timber in house construction. Until that is done we will find ourselves up against a tremendous difficulty. Every country in the world will be demanding the supplies of timber that are available and their demands will probably have priority over ours. Deputy Dillon, on another Estimate, referred to the operations of beetles in the timber of the roof of this building. There is no doubt that timber, while it has been used for building construction over a long number of years, is not an ideal material. If the timber is not of the best quality, it is certain to deteriorate very rapidly. I think our scientists should have their attention directed to the problem of finding a suitable substitute for timber.

I should also like to direct the Minister's attention to one aspect of the housing question as it affects rural Ireland. Naturally, the first function of local authorities is to provide houses for those who demand them. Representations are made to the local authorities by those in need of houses and attempts are made to supply that need. But we have districts in this country where there is a need for agricultural labourers' cottages but where there is really no demand because there are not labourers in the district seeking housing accommodation. For that reason I think that some effort should be made to find out the districts or areas where it would be desirable in the interests of agriculture that there should be more workers' houses. The deciding factor up to the present has been the demand made by would-be tenants. But there is also the demand of the agricultural industry. As I pointed out, there are districts where there is a dearth of agricultural labour. It is very difficult to meet the need because, if there are no cottages in a district, naturally there are no young workers growing up and getting married and demanding new houses. I suggest, therefore, that an investigation should be made to find out from people engaged in agriculture if there is a need for houses in a particular area instead of relying upon the demand made by workers. Very often you find that, where there is a considerable number of cottages in an area, it is in that area that you have a big demand for new cottages because there are families being reared and sons getting married who will demand houses.

I should also like to ask the Minister if there is any proposal under consideration in regard to housing for putting some limitation to the growth of some of our larger cities. What will happen eventually is that the City of Dublin will continue to grow and expand until it eats up the entire County of Dublin, and possibly portion of my own constituency.

You may be representing Dublin yet.

I hope not.

We have not power to deal with that.

I know that it may not be possible to effect this reform without legislation. I just mention the matter briefly, because I think the praiseworthy efforts of the Local Government Department to satisfy the needs of workers, particularly the people in slum areas, will lead to a steady and ever-increasing growth of our larger towns and cities. Something should be done to overcome that difficulty, and there should be some system of planning in regard to urban and city areas.

The Minister does not believe in planning.

The Minister has no power to limit the population.

I am afraid I would not like it to be accepted that he should limit the population. As a matter of fact, the population of this country is limited very drastically by emigration and by the economic policy generally of the Government, which has tended to keep the population down. We are hoping that emigration will cease, and that we may have to provide for an ever-increasing population. We must see that that population is not concentrated under the shadow of Nelson's Pillar, but is distributed more or less equally over the entire Twenty-Six Counties—or 32 Counties, as we hope it will be.

How would the Deputy suggest that might be done? It would be very helpful if he would give us his suggestions for dealing with that problem.

Most of the suggestions I have to put forward in regard to that problem would come under the Votes for Agriculture and Industry and Commerce. It is in the development of a sound agricultural and industrial policy that we will succeed in distributing our population more equally. One thing at least into which the Minister should inquire is the fact that very many of our people who depend upon the State for assistance are concentrated in our city areas. There should be some encouragement and inducement to them to reside in areas where the cost of living is lower than in the rural areas. It is bad policy to encourage people to come to the city to become unemployed. By the solution of the unemployment problem, we can relieve the congestion in the city areas, to some extent.

I should like to know if we are discussing old age pensions administration under this Vote. There is a provision in this Vote for the old age pensions appeals section.

The Minister for Local Government and Public Health is not responsible for old age pensions administration.

What is the real position? I take it that the general question of the provision in the Estimates in respect of old age pensions would be raised on this Estimate.

There is a special Vote for old age pensions.

I would like to know why they are included in this Vote.

We have only an appeal function. We have nothing to do with the general administration of old age pensions.

Surely the Minister has a function in respect of the extra payment to recipients of old age pensions?

No. We have no responsibility for the general administration of old age pensions.

At least, the Minister admits that he has responsibility for the appeals section.

Yes, of course. I am responsible for appointing an appeals officer.

In this connection, a circular was issued from the Department.

If the Deputy wants to discuss the circular, he is welcome to do so.

On that question, would it be convenient to have the discussion localised and separated from the general discussion?

I am not responsible for the Old Age Pensions Estimate.

There is an Estimate here.

Yes, Estimate No. 7.

The only point I want to raise in connection with that particular circular is that it is not desirable that undue interference should take place in regard to judicial officers in that Department. I am in agreement with the circular in principle, that applications by Deputies to judicial officers should not be allowed to interfere unduly with the proper work of administration. I think there would be general agreement with that broad principle, but I would like to know why the position was ever allowed to develop in which a judicial officer— the deciding officer in this case—was expected to give his decision verbally to Deputies who interviewed him. That was the established custom.

Is the Deputy referring to the Appeals Committee?

Yes. That was a very bad system and imposed a certain injustice on those who had no Deputy to appeal on their behalf. The deciding officer, forced to give his decision right away in the presence of the Deputy who interviewed him, found it difficult to give an impartial decision, and the danger was that he would be forced to make a concession to that particular applicant which he would not have made if he were allowed to consider the matter coolly in the absence of the Deputy. That meant a certain gain for those on whose behalf an application was made, but there were other people for whom no representations were made, and by the law of averages they were bound to suffer. Having given a considerable amount of time to the applications in regard to which representations were made, and perhaps having given a favourable decision, the danger was that the decisions would be adverse in cases where no representations were made. That system was wrong, and should not have been allowed to develop, so I think it is right to express approval of the action of the Minister in suspending it.

We have still the fact that the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary are in control of the entire Department, and there is nothing to prevent them from making direct representations to the deciding officer in the same way as Deputies made them heretofore—that is, out of their chronological order, and perhaps insisting upon a decision being given in their presence. There should be a definite assurance that that situation will not be allowed to develop, and that, if Deputies are prohibited from exercising certain powers which they had heretofore, the same prohibition will apply to the Parliamentary Secretary and to the Minister.

In connection with the supply of milk to children, I think difficulties have arisen in some areas. It has been found very difficult to secure supplies of suitable milk in certain districts where the people did not go in for dairying, and a grave hardship exists in such districts. I do not know whether it would be possible to overcome that difficulty; it might be overcome if it were made clear that this particular grant is of a permanent nature and that producers in areas where the milk is needed could make provision for producing the supply required. There certainly is grave hardship in those areas.

I want to raise one or two matters in connection with this Estimate. The first is the matter which has been touched upon by Deputy Cogan, and that is the question of appeals to the Department in respect of old age pensions. If the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary makes inquiries in the appeals section in the Custom House, I think they will find that I never took up much of the time of the appeals officers there. I certainly did not waste their time and I strongly object to the issue of that recent circular by the Department and signed by the Parliamentary Secretary. It seems to me to treat public representatives just as schoolboys, to be regimented and to make almost suppliant applications to see a deciding officer in the Custom House.

The Parliamentary Secretary and the Minister may have high views of deciding officers, but I can assure them that an ordinary sensible Deputy does not want to see the deciding officer out of any particular love for that official; he goes to see him only when public business necessitates doing so. Any sensible Deputy will go there only when it is necessary. The Parliamentary Secretary and the Minister may trot out a list of the Deputies who bring in a catalogue of old age pensioners from some area, or look for some pensioners from some town or townland, or half a constituency. Some Deputies may go so far as to keep records of constituents who are approaching 70 years of age and may devise other methods by which they can publicise their activities in respect of old age pensioners, hoping that the pensioners and all the relatives who cherish such a high regard for the pensioners will in due course, at the next election, recognise the Deputy's representations by voting for him.

If there are any such Deputies here, the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary, if they are wise, should get these boys out of the Custom House, because I think they are a disgrace to public life. What they do is simply peddling. It is not Parliamentary representation at all; it is simply peddling in votes.

I would keep Deputies of that type out, but there are other Deputies and I do not think it is fair to treat all Deputies in the same way as those who traffic in old age pension cases. I have a very strong objection to complying with the formula issued by the Parliamentary Secretary. I will not comply with it. I will find another method to ventilate grievances in respect of the decisions in pension cases. I do not want to influence deciding officers at all in their decisions. I do not want to get 10/- for a person entitled to 9/-. As a public representative, I feel I am entitled to go to the Local Government Department and see a deciding officer if my sense of duty compels me to do so, and get for a particular case such consideration as I, knowing the facts, think I ought to get, or that the applicant ought to get on the merits of his case.

The Parliamentary Secretary, in his circular, stated that making representations to the deciding officers meant that cases were not being dealt with in their proper chronological order. Does not every Parliamentary question mean the same thing? Does it not mean that the moment a question is submitted, a file is opened and somebody is chasing around for a few days in order to get material for the Minister's answer? Then again, supplementary replies have to be prepared for the Minister in case an awkward supplementary question may be asked. Does not all that mean getting special consideration for a case and taking it out of its chronological order? That is what Parliament is for—for the purpose of ascertaining what goes wrong in particular cases.

I have a good deal of sympathy with the Parliamentary Secretary if he wants to keep out of the Custom House Deputies who traffic in old age pension cases. I do not do that, and there are other Deputies who do not do it. If the Minister finds himself impeded by the activities of Deputies of his own Party to such an extent that they become a nuisance to the deciding officers, or if the Minister is impeded by Deputies of other Parties because they hawk cases around there, these folk ought to be dealt with, but that is no reason why a Deputy who does business in an ordinary way, who does not waste the time of deciding officers and who has no desire to go to the Custom House except on urgent business, and then only to submit a case on behalf of a constituent, should be deprived of making proper representations. I do not know on what ground the official attitude can be justified.

When the Cumann na nGaedheal Government was in office we had a somewhat similar situation. Deputy Mulcahy was then Minister for Local Government and all the boys on these benches were up in arms against it and they did not see why they could not make representations in old age pension cases. After the Cumann na nGaedheal ukase was withdrawn, Deputies had the right to carry out their business as they wished, but now we find this Government doing exactly the same as their predecessors many years ago. In former years the members of the present Government protested against it, and now they are doing the very thing against which they protested.

I suggest to the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary that whatever problem is to be dealt with in the Custom House so far as old age pensions representations are concerned, it has not been dealt with in an intelligent way by the issue of that circular, and Deputies whose peddling in old age pension cases was such as to cause that difficulty ought to be told that they must conduct themselves as responsible Deputies and have some regard for the time of the deciding officers. The circular ought not to apply to Deputies who are not responsible for practices of that kind.

There is another matter in connection with old age pensions and that is the supplementary allowances which may be paid to pensioners in rural areas. At present there is a State grant of £230,000 which is intended to meet 75 per cent. of the additional expenditure involved in paying the supplementary allowance of 2s. 6d. a week. Cases have come to my notice, and I daresay cases have come to the notice of other Deputies, in which persons in receipt of 10/- sought to get this supplementary allowance and I find, because of the methods of administering the allowance, it is virtually impossible for large numbers of persons to secure it. There is a means test imposed by the local authority on the applicant for the allowance. Any person who receives a pension of 10/- has to satisfy the Department that his income is not in excess of 6/- a week. A person who has no income, or if his income does not exceed 6/- a week, will get a pension of 10/-.

That is what the pensioner got in 1938-1939. The cost of living has gone up since by 70 per cent. and if the old age pensioners who had 10/- pre-war got 17/- a week now they would get only the 1939 equivalent of their 10/- pension. But they have got no increase in the pension, except by way of supplementary allowance—if they are lucky enough to have that.

When they come to look for the supplementary allowance of 2/6 per week, however, they find that they have to get over two hurdles: first, the hurdle of getting the 10/- from the Local Government Department and, secondly, and apparently a still more difficult hurdle, of getting the 2/6 per week from the local authority.

It is nothing short of disgraceful mockery of the sufferings of old age pensioners that the State and the local authority should impose two means tests in respect of an allowance of 12/6 per week for persons of 70 years of age. They can only get it when they reach 70 years of age, and it is in respect of a sum of 12/6 a week that we have two means tests. One would imagine that 12/6 a week would buy a farm or a house, or that it was a passport to economic security for months to come. When one thinks of how little that sum will buy to-day and discovers that the State imposes two means tests in respect of the securing of that sum, the whole thing seems to be the product of a huckster's mind. The State ought to be ashamed of its inquisitions into the means of an old age pensioner before it can shell out 12/6 a week. We have two means tests for an old age pensioner, but £400 a week for the Presidential establishment. We can pay £400 a week, or £22,000 a year, for that, but we must have two means tests before a person of 70 years of age can get an old age pension. That concept appears rather strange in the light of the flowery language in the Constitution, and which, I think, is just so much nonsense.

The basic principle of old age pensions does not come within the purview of the Minister's Department.

Nor does the Presidential allowance.

The Minister cannot be a Pooh-Bah altogether.

Is there not a sum of £12,000 for wages in the President's allowance? There is no talk about that.

That is what the Governor-General used to say.

I am no Governor-General.

That is what he used to say about his allowance.

But we hear nothing about that.

Let the Deputy make his own speech or ask an intelligent question. I will answer it, if I am allowed to do so.

That is an intelligent question. That money is paid to the people the Deputy represents, but he does not recognise it.

That is a new case for a President. A better case could be made on that basis for a king, because kings are still more expensive.

Perhaps the Deputy had better leave the President out of the discussion.

The Deputy should read and study the Estimates.

I was reading them before the Deputy saw them.

You do not seem to have benefited very much.

These exchanges must cease. They are not part of the business of the House and Deputy Norton must be allowed to proceed.

I was saying in connection with these means tests that the whole procedure is the concept of a huckster's mind. After two means tests, we give these unfortunate people 12/6 a week and that type of treatment for old age pensioners makes very strange reading when we consider the vast sums we spend elsewhere, without any means test whatever. I instanced the giving to the President of a very lordly salary and a substantial entertainment allowance, but the whole foundations of the State would apparently be undermined unless we had two means tests to make sure that a person of 70 years of age, who is likely to live a few more years, does not draw 12/6 a week for too long a period and has not got some secret income of a few shillings per week from some other source. That treatment of old age pensioners cannot be justified on any basis of humanity, economics or financial control.

If these people got an old age pension of 17/- a week, it would only be the equivalent of the 10/- which they were receiving in 1939, but it is not proposed to give them 17/-. They get only 12/6, which represents a 25 per cent. increase on their 1939 pension, notwithstanding the fact that the cost of living has increased by 70 per cent. in the meantime. The allowance of 2/6 per week to these people is a paltry, beggarly allowance, but, bad as it is, it ought to be paid without a means test. It is impossible for members of local authorities, no matter what they may desire, to secure payment of this supplementary allowance in all cases, because the whole matter is in the hands of the manager, who will do as he likes. He may, however, be more responsive to pressure by the Minister and the Department, whose employee he is in the last analysis, and I suggest to the Minister that it is high time that county managers were told that these supplementary allowances of 2/6 a week should be paid automatically. There is no reason why it should not be done. The merits of the case demand that it be done, and the delay in doing it has been too great already. I hope that, recognising the plight of these unfortunate people, some steps will now be taken to grant these allowances automatically, and to get rid of at least the second odious means test.

I want to raise a matter on the Minister's policy in regard to housing grants. When the erection of a labourer's cottage cost less than £300 the State bore, in respect of certain schemes, two-thirds of the interest charges, and that continued to be the position when labourers' cottages were being built in most counties for even less than £300. That position has now changed entirely. The estimates for the erection of labourers' cottages in the past five years show that such cottages are costing well over £400, and all the indications are that their erection will cost very considerably more in future; but if the Department is going to maintain its policy of paying a two-third subsidy only in respect of sums up to £300, local authorities will be placed in the position in which they will be erecting labourers' cottages costing upwards of £600 in the post-war period—certainly in the immediate post-war period—while getting a subsidy of approximately half that amount, leaving the other half uncovered from the point of view of any subsidy from the Department.

I do not want to interrupt the Deputy but, on a point of order, may I point out that these subsidies are fixed by law? I know of no housing policy but the policy laid down by this House in the Housing Acts which it passed. I pay these grants strictly in accordance with these Acts. I have no power to do otherwise. It is the administration of these Acts which may be raised and not the amount of the grants.

I know all that. The Minister is a travelling compendium. I put it to the Minister that he ought to be seriously concerned about this matter and ought not to treat it with levity. I was pointing out that in the post-war period we will have a very serious housing problem. Labourers' cottages which were built in 1933 and 1934 for £250 will probably cost £550 if built within the next two years. The present subsidy in respect of loan charges extends only up to £300. The remaining £250 or £300 in the post-war period will be uncovered in respect of that State subsidy, with the result that local authorities, if compelled to pay £550 or £600 for the erection of a labourer's cottage, will have a subsidy in respect of only £300 and, in respect of the other £300, will have to charge a rent based on the £300 in respect of which they receive no subsidy. The Minister's advisers will tell him what the effect of that will be on the rents of labourers' cottages.

He will find, if he examines the matter, as I have, that labourers' cottages, if erected in the post-war period in such circumstances, that is, costing £550 or £600, with a subsidy in respect of only £300, will not be let for 2/6 a week as they are in most cases at present, but at 5/-, 6/- and up to 8/- per week. Agricultural workers and rural workers generally, subject as they are to intermittent employment, will not be able to maintain themselves in houses of which the charge for rent is as high as 8/- per week.

The local authority will not be able to let houses at that rent, and even if they were to let them to tenants on their promise to pay such a rent, the tenants would not be able to pay it. In that way a very serious rent arrears problem will arise for the local authority. I suggest to the Minister that the least the Department ought to do is to tell the local authority where it stands in this matter. Is the local authority, in the post-war period, to be confronted with a situation in which, instead of getting a subsidy of two-thirds on the entire cost of building a labourer's cottage, it is to get a subsidy of two-thirds on only half the cost of building it, building costs in the meantime having increased by 100 per cent. as compared with the cost of building when the subsidy scheme was introduced under the 1932 Act? In this matter local authorities are, at present, in a state of bewilderment. They do not know where they stand. I know that in respect of schemes in my constituency the problem is to ascertain what the rents of these cottages are going to be as well as the capacity of the people to pay such rents as may be charged if the costs of building labourers' cottages in the post-war period are going to be approximately 100 per cent. greater than they were when the subsidisation scheme was introduced in 1932. At all events, no matter what the Government may intend to do in the matter next year or the year after, it is essential that the local authorities should be told now what the position is so that they can plan and be prepared for a situation in which they will be erecting labourers' cottages, the rents of which will be substantially higher than the rents of the cottages built immediately before the war or in the early days of the war.

On this Estimate I want to make an appeal to the Minister. In the areas administered by the Dun Laoghaire Borough Council and Balbriggan Town Commissioners the scheme for the provision of meals for children attending school is in operation, but not in the rural parts of the County Dublin. It is the unanimous opinion of parents, teachers and all concerned that where this scheme is in operation it has conferred great benefit on the children, both from the point of view of their health and education. In the rural areas the children of farm labourers have to trudge two and three miles to school.

I have often seen little "toddlers" of five, six, and seven years old walking long distances to school—some of them in their bare feet. If this scheme were extended, as I suggest, it would confer a great benefit on them. I know that the cost of doing so would be big, but in view of the benefits which the scheme would confer on the children in those areas, I think the Minister should agree to it. In some of the small towns and villages in the County Dublin parents who can afford it provide their children with a lunch consisting of soup, milk, or something of that kind, but labourers' children, some of them the children of unemployed labourers who may have walked three, four, or five miles to school in their bare feet, are deprived of the benefit of this free meal scheme. I think that is a pity. The Minister and his predecessor have introduced many schemes that have conferred a great benefit on the working-class people. We have widows' and orphans' pensions, grants for the provision of free milk, free footwear and various other schemes. I would therefore strongly urge the Minister to consider the extension of this free meals scheme to children attending the rural schools. During the last eight or nine years I have appealed to the Minister and his predecessor to consider the matter.

There is another matter that I desire to bring to the Minister's notice. Where the head of the family is in receipt of the children's allowances— there may be six, seven, or eight children in the family—and is getting, say, four or five half-crowns, as the case may be, if that man is unemployed and in receipt of home assistance, the home assistance supervisor takes the amount of the children's allowances into account when fixing his home assistance allowances. I think that even though the Minister may not think that a correct procedure, he should put the position beyond all doubt by circularising the local authorities to the effect that, so far as the children's allowances are concerned, they should not be taken into account when making home assistance grants to families in need of them. I have known that to occur in several cases, and I have had occasion to write to the Minister about it.

I heard a good deal of criticism about a circular that was sent out by the Department in connection with old age pensions. Few Deputies must have had as many consultations with old age pensioners as I had. I think the Parliamentary Secretary, even for the short time that he has been in office, can vouch that he has received more than the average number of communications from me on behalf of old age pensioners. While I was not always satisfied with the result of representations I made, even without visiting the Custom House on such business I felt that I always got satisfaction when I put the facts before the Department. That has been my experience for a number of years.

Deputy Norton referred to the exhibition being held in the Mansion House in connection with the anti-tuberculosis campaign. A demonstration was given there of the proper way to prepare food in order to combat the complaint. In addition to cleanliness the food suggested consisted of salad, eggs, milk, tomatoes, scallions, etc. On the other side must be considered the position of the poor man who is suffering from tuberculosis and families whose main diet consists of tea, and what is cooked on a frying pan. Many of these people live on bread, sausages or eggs, when they are cheap, and an odd pound of steak. It is all very well to demonstrate how to combat tuberculosis by special dieting, but the trouble is where are the people affected to get the money to buy it? I know that some local authorities and local managers make provision to enable people to get additional food. In the rural areas the position very often is that a person affected with tuberculosis feels, if not working, that he is not wanted by other members of the family. Unless he can earn, where would a person of that class get the type of food recommended for the treatment of the disease? Where the head of a household is affected, some provision should be made to enable that man to get nourishment to help him to be cured. I am glad to say that in some instances local managers have made arrangements not to collect rents during illness. I ask the Minister to give a little consideration to some scheme whereby people who remain in their own homes will receive treatment on the lines suggested at the exhibition, and be entitled to certain monetary grants or to dockets to get nourishment until they were admitted to a sanatorium. Deputies have many business associations with the Department of Local Government. I think the administration of this Department has justified itself, and that the Minister should be proud not only of the work of the sections dealing with hospitals, housing, and roads, but all the other services controlled by the Department. I wish that every other Department of the State were as efficiently conducted as this Department.

I had not the pleasure of listening to the Minister's introductory statement and I wish to express my regret for missing it. I should like to know whether the Minister has any figures concerning the amount of loans outstanding by local authorities as a result of turf-cutting operations. The Department sanctioned loans which were applied by local authorities in order to carry out valuable work of the kind referred to, and if he has figures I should like to have them, as well as any assets that may be available against such loans. I am aware that even in my own constituency fairly large sums are outstanding, but as against that, turf that was cut last year, and perhaps the previous year, is still lying on the bogs unsold. I visited a bog on the borders of my constituency in Leix-Tipperary on which I saw a large quantity of very good turf which was cut last year. Because it was not removed at the proper time that turf was to a certain extent hindering the activities of the local authority this year. I understand some dispute took place there during the turf-cutting season but I am not going to enter into the merits of that now. I suggest that the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary might get in touch with the local authorities to see if the turf in question could be removed immediately. I understand that there is still a quantity of valuable turf there. I noticed in the estimate that there is a reduction this year of £36,000 under sub-head U—development work on bogs acquired by local authorities. Does that indicate any particular point of view as far as bog roads are concerned? Is it to be understood that there is a considerable improvement in the condition of bog roads? I am assured by members of the county council in my constituency that a large amount of work of that kind has yet to be done.

I should like the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary to make inquiries as to whether or not there is a large number of applications for grants for the carrying out of bog-road repair or bog-drainage work awaiting sanction in his Department. In this connection, I should like to inquire from the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary whether he has any complaints from local authorities or the workers employed by them concerning the failure of those authorities to provide free transport for large groups of workers living long distances from the bogs at which they are working under those local authorities. I have been approached by representatives of workers in a town on the borders of my constituency concerning this matter. They claim to represent 200 workers on a certain bog and they state that the county manager or the county surveyor, or whoever is responsible, refuses to provide them with free transport.

The Parliamentary Secretary, with his knowledge of rural conditions, will realise, I am sure, that it is very unfair to the local authorities, to the taxpayers who have to find the money and to the workers that those employees should have to travel from four to six miles in large groups from the towns and villages where they live to the bog on which they work. A large number of women are also involved in some cases. The fact that men and women must walk those long distances is bound to have some effect on the production of turf in the bogs concerned. I think that it was the present Minister who gave authority to the county manager to provide free transport in cases of this kind. The county managers should be reminded of that authorisation. Their failure to provide transport had a serious effect on the production of turf last year and is having a serious effect on production this year. If failure to provide free transport is due to shortage of petrol, that is an explanation. In the case I have in mind, certain lorry owners offered to carry the turf workers to the bog but the county surveyor or the county manager refused to avail of the offer. This matter affects a large number of workers in a wide area in my constituency. I have been assured by representatives of the workers that they have found it absolutely impossible to procure tyres to enable them to cycle to and from their work in those bogs. That complaint is not peculiar to my constituency. I am sure that there is a similar complaint in other turf-cutting counties. The only people who can secure tyres are those who have enough money to pay for them, and turf workers are not of that class.

Is not that the responsibility of the Minister for Supplies?

In the case of the tyres, that would be so, but I am making the case that, if the turf workers concerned were in a position to get tyres even at a fairly high cost, there would not be the same complaint regarding the failure to supply free transport, the provision of which, I understand, the Minister is prepared to sanction.

As regards the conditions under which turf workers are employed by local authorities, will the Parliamentary Secretary say whether he has received during the present year complaints from workers' organisations or county managers or local authorities in respect of the wages paid to road workers employed by the local authorities on turf-cutting operations? In my constituency, where a considerable quantity of turf has been cut during the whole of the emergency period, a peculiar position exists. The turf workers employed by the local authorities who are, in the main, old road workers, are compelled to go into the bogs and cut turf for certain months of the summer and autumn at wages far below the rate they would receive from private employers in the same area and far below the rates and conditions generally accorded to turf workers who are kept in the camps and who operate under the Department of Industry and Commerce. The turf workers employed by that Department —those who live in the turf camps—in my constituency cost the State, on an average, about £5 10s. per week. Private employers in the same area who require sleansmen or barrowmen have to pay 12/- and 13/- a day to those workers when they require turf for their own use. The local authority compels the road workers in the same area to cut turf for them and for the State—it all, eventually, goes into the same pool—at a wage of 9/- or 10/- a day.

The difference in the conditions enjoyed by those who live in the turf camps and who are paid by the Department of Industry and Commerce and the conditions forced on road workers engaged in cutting turf for the local authorities and for the community cannot be defended, seeing that those conditions are imposed by different Ministers of the same Government.

Would the Deputy state, as a matter of information, who has the responsibility for the fixing of the wages of those workers?

The Minister for Local Government accepts responsibility for fixing the wages and conditions of turf workers who are employed by local authorities, and the Minister for Industry and Commerce is responsible for the conditions applying to those who live in turf camps and who are also cutting turf for the community. In my constituency, there is that difference— between an average of £5 10s. in the camps and an average of £3 a week paid those employed by the local authority.

Are they paid by piece-work?

I should like to hear my old friend, Deputy Allen, defending the difference in the conditions.

I was merely asking if these men were employed on piece-work rates.

Neither section is employed on a piece-work basis. In some areas, the turf workers are employed on a piece-work basis both by the Department of Industry and Commerce and by the local authority.

And are getting good wages.

I am talking about the average weekly wages of those employed under the Department of Industry and Commerce and those employed by the county managers under the Department of Local Government. The two sections to which I am referring are cutting turf for the community under a difference of conditions that could hardly be defended even by Deputy Allen.

I was not defending it.

I shall listen with great pleasure to Deputy Allen if he can justify the differentiation between those two classes who are cutting turf for the community as a whole. There is a great deal of jealousy in the areas where that sort of thing is happening, and I should like to hear from the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary the grounds upon which he defends that policy. I feel very proud that I am one of the five Deputies for a constituency which rendered great national service during the emergency on work of this kind. I feel very proud that, since the commencement of this whole scheme, I have defended the Government's attitude on general-policy grounds, but I find it impossible to explain the present differentiation between two sections of workers engaged under the aegis of two Ministries, these sections having two different rates of pay and conditions of service.

I want to bring, very briefly, under the notice of the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary, the case of a complaint that I was surprised to receive recently from a member of one county council in my constituency. I made a representation to the Department of Local Government and Public Health in connection with the matter, which had to do with an appeal by a number of nurses in my constituency against a decision by the county manager. The appeal, I assumed, had been sent forward by the county manager, and I was told that, in law, they were entitled to submit their case as against his decision. To my surprise, however, I learned that the Department had not received the appeal. I assume that the county manager was bound to forward that appeal, seeing that it was a matter between him and the Department, or the Minister in charge of the Department, but I was informed that the appeal had not been sent up to the Department of Local Government, or at least had not been received by the Department. I want to know what right has the county manager to withhold that appeal? I have been told that many cases of the kind in my constituency have not been sent up to the Department. I hope that that will not happen again. As a result of the reply I had from the Minister's Department, I was surprised to hear that this appeal had not been sent up, and if such cases have not been sent up to the Department, I hope that a decision will be given on the matter at a reasonably early date.

There is another matter which I should like to raise, and that is to ask what can be done, or what has been done, to enable cottage plots, that have been acquired in some cases for the purpose of erecting labourers' cottages, to be fenced so that they can be put into food production as soon as possible. To what extent has the Department succeeded in getting the local authorities to fence these plots? I have here a letter, dated 17th April, 1942, dealing with this matter of the fencing of labourers' cottage plots so as to enable them to get into food production as soon as possible. I received a reply, dated 10th March, 1942, but I have yet to learn whether any reasonable progress has been made in that direction, so far as my own constituency is concerned, at any rate. I was wondering why it is that greater progress has not been made. Is the delay in acquiring these plots, and putting them into proper condition, due to the failure of solicitors acting on behalf of the local authority, or what is it due to? My reason for raising this matter is that the failure to deal with the people who have applied for these cottages is bound to affect food production. I am raising this matter, particularly, because I am informed that much better progress has been made in other counties, and I was wondering whether it was the local authority, or the solicitors acting on their behalf, or the Minister's Department that were responsible for the failure to carry out the Minister's intention in this matter.

I would also ask the Minister, or the Parliamentary Secretary, to search his files with a view to finding out to what extent applications for road work or turf work have been held up in Leix-Offaly. In that connection, I understand that the Department of Local Government and the Board of Public Works work together; but if there should be a shortage of fuel, since there does not seem to be any possibility of getting coal in the immediate future, I urge that everything possible should be done to help the local authorities to carry on in the production of fuel in the way that they have carried on during the past few years. I know that certain bog roads are in a very bad condition, and I say that the bad condition of these roads and of bridges leading into the bogs has been the cause of the failure to get out the turf. Therefore, I would urge on the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary to speed up the work of putting these roads and bridges into proper condition in the best way they can, so as to make fuel available for our people.

In the course of the Minister's statement, which, I am sure, the House will agree was a record for brevity, he mentioned that he believed that there was a possibility in the coming year of having more houses built. He also stated that about 60 per cent., or 70 per cent., of these houses were needed for urban areas, according to recent surveys, and that about 30 per cent. were needed for rural areas. In that connection, I want to ask the Minister what will be the cost to local authorities for building in the future? Assuming that the cost of building materials remains at the present rate, what provision has he made so that local authorities can go ahead with building projects? I think the Minister is aware that no local authority could possibly go ahead with building projects at the present cost of building materials. The City of Dublin, possibly, being a wealthy area, may be an exception and may be able to go ahead with building, but, certainly, no rural area or small urban area could go ahead with building at the present cost. According to recent estimates, I assume that rural authorities must pay a subsidy of £13 10s. Od. in respect of each house they build, and, providing that costs remain as they are, there will be very little encouragement to local authorities to go ahead with the building schemes that are sorely needed in every area. A few houses, for instance, that were built in an area that I know something about, cost something like £550 each, and with the Government subsidy of 60 per cent., and the rent paid by the tenant of 2/6 a week, that means that the local authority will have to pay £13 10s. per annum. That would be too much, and they could not possibly proceed with building at the present cost of materials. I hoped and expected that the Minister would have mentioned something with regard to the future policy in this respect, and would have told us whether he believed that local authorities would undertake house building at the present cost or not. I am afraid, much as I regret to say it, that it is almost outside their ability to do so. Rates in urban areas are fairly high already as a result of housing activities in the past and they would be very reluctant to undertake housing schemes in the immediate future unless costs came down appreciably. Either rents have to go up or costs must come down, and the rents charged for houses erected immediately before the emergency are up to the limit. If wages remain at the present level, I think there is no possibility of increasing rents in urban areas.

With regard to rural housing, I admit that rents are low, but I doubt if the agricultural labourer on his present rate of wages could pay more than the present rent of 2/- or 3/-. I hope that if materials become available in the present year, and if the Minister and the Department expect local authorities to proceed with big housing schemes in order to relieve unemployment and to house people who are badly in need of houses, they will do something to recast the whole finance of housing schemes. That must be done if these schemes are to be undertaken.

I desire to make one or two complaints with regard to housing. Complaints have been made to me recently that there is a very long delay in dealing with applications for certificates for the building of new houses by private persons. Some of these people made application, lodged the plans and all necessary documents six months ago, and they have not since heard from the Department, or received their certificates. The same observations apply to applications for reconstruction grants. Is it the policy of the Department deliberately to delay or not to encourage the building or reconstruction of houses? A number of individuals have old materials which they could utilise in reconstructing houses, or probably in building new ones, and they are wondering what is the reason for the delay. These delays have become more apparent in the last year or so. Three or four people came to see me in recent weeks and told me that they had applied over six months ago for certificates for the building of new houses or the reconstruction of old ones, and they have heard nothing about their applications since.

We also expected to hear something from the Minister on the three years' functioning of the County Management Act—a general review of how he believed the Act was being operated in the country. As we are on the eve of getting new councils, perhaps he would like to try out a new term before he would give us any general review on the administration of the Act. I do not propose to say anything further on that, but we should like to hear the Minister's view on the matter at some future time.

I think the Minister's Department is also responsible for dealing with old age pension appeals. I have received complaints, rather serious complaints in this way, that in some cases while the local pensions officer who represents the Department of Finance agreed to a certain pension—I think it was 6/- a week in one case — when the applicant appealed to the Minister against the award of the local pensions committee there was the extraordinary result that the pension was reduced by the appeals department. When the officer representing the Department of Finance is satisfied with an award made by the local committee, I wonder how the appeals department of the Minister can see their way to reduce the pension? It was reduced in one case from 6/-, the amount granted by the local committee, to 3/-. I suppose it is the function of the appeals department to reduce pensions as well as to increase them, but until recently when the officer representing the Department of Finance agreed to the award made by the local committee I never found a single case in which the award was reduced. I hope it is not becoming the general policy of the Minister's Department to reduce old age pensions which are passed by the local committee and agreed to by the pensions officer. I have heard of two such cases in recent weeks, but I hope that is not becoming a general practice. While I am on the question of old age pensions—I do not know whether the Minister's Department is responsible for this or not—I might point out that I mentioned before in this House that an agricultural labourer, who worked, say, in the year 1944, finds it impossible to get his pension in 1945 although he had reached the age of 70 and had retired. It is held that he earned more than the statutory amount in the previous year and therefore he must go on home assistance and remain for another year before he will get the pension.

I mention this matter in conjunction with the other question which I raised in regard to pensions which are reduced on appeal. Certainly pensions which are agreed to by the local committee and the pensions officer should not be reduced.

There is one other matter to which I should like to call attention, namely, the necessity for speeding up the publication of the annual report of the Department of Local Government. I wonder could that be speeded up by a year at least? It is generally two years behind time, for what reason nobody seems to know. We are understood to have most efficient local authorities and efficient staffs, and I am sure they make returns periodically. The Minister can compel them, if he wishes, to make these returns at specified times, but as I say the report is generally a year or two years late. There is not much use in having a report for 1943 coming out in 1945 because all interest has been lost in it by that time. I think the public should be given the report of the Local Government Department including the various local government returns, within three months of the end of the financial year. Since the emergency the delay has been much more protracted than heretofore. I would ask the Minister to see that the report of the Department of Local Government should come out within three months of the end of the year, just like the reports of other Departments. The Department of Agriculture brings out a report within a short time of the end of the financial year.

The Department of Industry and Commerce issue useful reports every quarter. They are able to get out their returns. The Department of Local Government seems to be the Cinderella Department in that respect. We do not know why that is so. It is a most efficient Department in other directions but in the matter of getting out returns and their report, they lag very much behind.

There are one or two suggestions I wish to make to the Minister with regard to local authorities and the preparation of their estimates. The Minister made a long statement on the matter of the Kerry County Council and the reasons why he found it necessary to disband that council and to appoint a commissioner. From what I read in the Press, I think the Minister had no option in view of the attitude adopted by the council. I want to make these suggestions in respect of county councils generally. I think the last Kerry County Council were, to the extent of 80 or 90 per cent., new to the council, men who had come on the council only in the last couple of years. Under the present system of presenting estimates to local authorities it is nearly impossible for any person who had not some knowledge of estimates and local government administration to understand how those estimates are made up. I have the utmost sympathy with men coming on to a county council for the first time under the County Management Act. They have no possibility of knowing anything about it. I suggest to the Minister that the managers—they are his managers, I suppose—should give local authorities far more information in that respect than they are wont to do. Their object all the time seems to be to keep information from the council. The manager and the staff seem to be interested in withholding from the authority the information they are justly entitled to. Unless local authorities get more information and more detail as to the estimates there will probably be many rows similar to the row with the Kerry County Council. That is a possibility and it is an important aspect. A more sympathetic view should be taken of the lack of knowledge on the part of members of local authorities with regard to the compilation of estimates and such matters, especially in the case of new members. The Minister should advise his managers to be more careful and to give the members of local authorities far more detailed information as to the estimates. The estimates are given under two or three headings and the members of local authorities cannot segregate the various items or fully understand how the money is to be expended. I speak with some knowledge of this matter. I hope that in future more detailed information will be given to the members of local authorities. It is true that they have control over the purse in a certain direction but that is only to a very small extent. The local authority must provide an adequate amount of money to maintain the particular services for which demand is made and local authorities generally have been good in that matter.

I should like to ask the Minister to indicate to the House what has been the trend in the past three years in the cost of administration of local authorities. Is it not a fact that there has been an upward trend without reference to the emergency bonus? What has been the trend in the number of officials? Is the Minister watching that matter? We were led to believe and to hope that we would have greater efficiency and cheaper administration. I wonder if we are getting that. I should like the Minister to pay particular attention to costings, because we will be facing a critical period if we are going to build houses at present costs. The ratepayers will find great difficulty in providing for all the social services that are needed in the country and we must have the most efficient administration that it is possible to have. It rests in the Minister's hands, because the local authorities have no control whatever. They were left no control in the matter of staffs and the payment of staffs. These are matters for sanction by the Minister and the local authorities are not consulted and have no right to object. I am not saying that the costs are going up steeply but I believe there is a tendency in that direction. The costs of local administration will increase and the number of employees in administrative capacities will tend to increase unless the matter is carefully watched by the Minister's Department.

Ba mhaith liom buíochas agus comh-gháirdeachas a ghabháil leis an Aire agus, go generálta, leis na hoifigí i ngach craobh den Roinn Rialtais Aitiúil agus Sláinte Poiblí mar gheall ar na scéimeanna atá leagtha amach acu, fá stiúrú an Aire. Má dhéanann gach Bord Poiblí an gnó a chíonn siad atá le déanamh, is soiléir go mbeidh a lán oibre ar siúl i gcóir na ndaoine atá ar a lorg fá láthair ar fuid na tíre, agus I gcóir na ndaoine thar lear ar a dteacht abhaile arís i ndiaidh a chéile.

The Minister's statement with regard to adequate housing and the provision of adequate housing indicates a close survey of the problem in urban and rural areas and the figures he has outlined indicate a progressive solution of this very pressing problem. I am afraid Deputy Norton's approach to the problem is similar to the merely critical, passive attitude of many of the representatives of public bodies, without showing any initiative or progressive spirit. That has been the attitude, I think, since the implementation of the managerial system. The tendency is to leave everything to the manager, while the members of the local authorities take very passive interest. The main thing is that the houses are to be built and let at a rate within the capacity of the tenants to pay and that the occupants shall be got to till their plots for the benefit of the household and, incidentally, for the benefit of the community. In this connection, the cottage proprietors and tenants who show initiative and energy in the cultivation of their plots should not be penalised by having that taken into consideration for the purposes of the various means tests.

With reference to Deputy Norton's criticism, I think all the matters he dealt with in regard to housing have been considered by the Minister and by his Department. Although I am not a member of a public body, I have taken sufficient interest in the problem to know that the various managers and chairmen of local authorities have been called into consultation by the Minister and his Department in connection with housing schemes for the future.

I am sure that the financial side as well as the constructive side of the building problem has been adequately dealt with in that way. Deputy Norton and others who make criticisms without putting forward any constructive suggestions merely do so for the sake of making debating points. They do not add very much to the scheme of things or to the public support of the administration of local affairs in the country.

Like Deputy Allen, and some others who have spoken, I hope and expect it is the policy of the Department to encourage, as far as they can, private enterprise in the building sphere. There is a very acute shortage of houses both in the urban and rural areas, and I am very pleased to learn from the Minister that 16,000 additional houses will be built in the rural areas. We all know that when a house becomes vacant, either in an urban or a rural area, there are at least four or five or six families looking for it. The need is there, and it cannot at the moment be supplied, but I am sure that as soon as possible building will be undertaken again. The provision of houses will help to root the people in the soil. If the people in the rural districts get nice homes, with a plot attached where they can provide for the needs of the house in the way of fresh vegetables, it will be an inducement to them to remain on the land. The people of Ireland love the soil of Ireland. We know that at various periods of our history there have been land agitations. It is the desire of the people to remain on the land, not to clear away from it, and I am sure the policy of the Department will help very much in that direction. The road improvements schemes outlined by the Minister, although they are expensive, will be welcomed not only from the point of view of the employment which will be given in the various districts, but also on account of the travelling facilities which they will provide for the public.

The Minister is to be complimented on the improved scales of salaries for nurses, but I think in some cases the local authorities are very slow in implementing the Minister's ideas. No doubt, the skill and knowledge and vigilance of those very highly trained ladies have an important bearing on the success of public health schemes, and in many cases in the past they were very poorly paid for their services. When the Minister has given the lead to local bodies, it is only right that they should be more prompt in granting the bonuses even to their temporary staffs. They have been very slow in doing that. There is another matter to which I wish to direct the Minister's attention—I know he has only a more or less supervisory interest in the matter; the actual executive authority is the local manager—and that is the number of men who have been in full-time temporary employment for years and years, without being entitled to the extra emoluments which they would otherwise get in the positions they hold.

If they are employed full time, it shows that there is adequate work there for them, and after a preliminary period of two or three years at the outside they ought to be put on the permanent staff. I have known men who have been for up to ten years employed by the local authorities in responsible positions, and still they are not on the permanent staff. I know that the Minister sent out a query to the local authorities in regard to this matter. That should have been a hint to them to do something for those people, but in many cases of which I am aware nothing has been done so far. Also there are very many skilled clerks who are taken on every year by the county authorities during the rating period, and perhaps, also for the franchise. They get about six months' employment, and during the rest of the year they are either on the unemployment benefit or on the dole. Under the managerial system, I think better provision could be made for those men if they were allowed to do holiday duty both in the public health department, and in the public assistance department of the local administration. It would at any rate give them, perhaps, eight months' employment in the year, and would help them to earn emoluments which would be conducive to a better economy in their homes.

I have nothing further to add, beyond complimenting the Minister and his Department on the splendid report he has given to-day indicating the work of the Department for the future. The very important improvements in our public health schemes from year to year and the measures that have been introduced in that regard during the past year are welcomed by the community in general. The Department of Local Government and Public Health is one of our most important Departments. It is being directed on a basis which gives confidence to the people that the interests of the country and of all sections of the community, rich and poor alike, get due consideration in so far as the finances of the State permit.

Galway Corporation is very much concerned about this question of housing finance which has been referred to by a number of Deputies. I know that the Minister, in an interjection which he made, pointed out that he is precluded by statute from deciding what the subsidy is to be, but I wonder is there anything he might say with regard to the question of getting money at a cheaper rate so that those houses might be let at a somewhat lower rent. In Galway town there is a general feeling that the rents have gone too high for the pockets of the working classes, and whatever the Department can do to assist in overcoming that difficulty will be welcomed very much. The Deputies for West Galway were requested by the Galway Corporation to bring this matter to the Minister's attention, and this is the first opportunity we have had of doing so.

With regard to labourers' cottages, I should like to suggest to the Minister that where possible they ought not to be built in terraces or rows. Where it is possible to build each house separately on its own plot of ground, that is the ideal thing. If that is not possible, perhaps it could be arranged that not more than two would be built together. In some of those cottages which I have seen, the fire grates are entirely too small. Cottages built in places where turf will always be burned should have much larger grates. Some of them which I have seen would not hold more than two sods of turf.

I think that is a great want in these cottages. Another matter is that it seems to me some of them were built without the supervision of a clerk of works and I think that, in consequence, the work was not as well done as it might otherwise have been. The engineering staff of the local authority did their part of the work as well as they possibly could but, with the other work they had to do, they could not be on the scene to supervise the sort of materials used. I think all such schemes ought to have a clerk of works so as to ensure that good materials will be used and that they will be properly handled.

A matter that is very often brought to our attention in Galway is the slippery surface of the roads. On all the approaches to Galway City the roads are quite dangerous for horse traffic. I think the time has arrived when the Department's engineering staff ought to try to find some remedy for this. Horse traffic is most essential, and on it towns like Galway depend for produce. Very often the owners of the horses are obliged to move from one side of the road to the other, so that they are more often on the wrong side of the road than on the right side, with consequent danger to other traffic. I ask the Minister to bring the matter to the attention of the engineering department to see if something can be done to remedy it. Lastly, I should like the Minister to say if he has any information or if he has any opinion as to when it may be possible to commence the building of the promised central hospital in Galway. As he knows, it is very badly needed, but, as so much has been said about it, I do not think it is necessary to say anything more about it now.

I wish to deal with a number of points arising in connection with this Estimate. Deputy Cosgrave spoke about the deterioration of the main roads in the country. As the Minister has already said, this has been due to the lack of tar and other materials and to some degree to the fact that in areas where every worker who could be found had been taken for turf cutting. Even if materials had been available during the summer time, when major road repairs can be best effected, there would actually be a scarcity of workers. The deterioration varies according to the local conditions. Obviously, where the foundations are poor, the road would deteriorate at a more rapid rate. It will be the first duty of county surveyors to effect urgent and needed repairs on the roads of the country; by that I mean road dressing and not road reconstructing. The cost of that, as has already been indicated by the Minister, will be somewhere in the nature of £2,000,000, and it will be independent of the major road improvement to be gradually effected in connection with the road plan and the new method of road designing, full details of which were made available to the House on a former occasion. Every effort is being made to secure tar and other road materials in the appropriate Department. Consideration is being given to the best method of securing imported road machinery which may be available now that the war is over in European theatres.

In regard to road expenditure, this must depend largely on the produce of the Road Fund and also on the contribution for unemployment relief in the areas where there is a high proportion of unemployed persons. In regard to the protection of horse traffic from slipping, there has been a great deal of discussion on this matter amongst experts. There is no ideal method of providing for a non-slip surface. One of the best methods of avoiding accidents is for horses to be properly shod for tarred roads. In many cases the method of shoeing suitable for tarred roads is not suitable for horses mostly engaged in doing heavy field work. The degree of slipperiness depends on the type of stone used. Where granite is available, the non-skid surface lasts longer than where the materials consist of limestone. The proposal to have a border of water-bound macadam is undesirable, because the result is a step down which takes place between the tarred portion and the water-bound macadam portion, which is most dangerous both to motor and horse traffic. Sanding at the side of the road, except as an emergency measure, is most inadvisable, because of the abrasive effect of the sand on the tarred surface. However, it is possible to state that in the road plan now in preparation, wherever it is considered desirable there will be a special road verge for use by horse traffic and this will be included in the road design where it is deemed advisable; in other words, where there is a large amount of horse traffic, or wherever there is a steep gradient, or wherever the circumstances deem it to be suitable.

In regard to the old age pensions appeal section, I can assure Deputy Allen that pensions are very rarely reduced from the amount recommended by the investigation officer. While there is statutory power to reduce such pensions, the number would be quite negligible in the year, and the fact that he was informed of two cases must be regarded as a coincidence. As to the circular issued by the Minister's authority in regard to representations by Deputies, I am glad to say that, on the whole, we have had satisfactory observations and very little complaint. The custom of giving verbal decisions, which was adverted to by Deputy Cogan, grew up gradually and was, perhaps, due to the fact that the Minister leaves the old age pensions appeal administration in a very large measure to the deciding officers, who have judicial power. I am certain that there was no evil intention in allowing this custom to grow. The administration of the old age pensions appeals office was changed on a number of occasions. At one time visits were allowed. Then, for a short period, they were entirely forbidden. Then they were allowed again. Now they are allowed and permitted, as Deputies know, provided that Deputies can give reasonable evidence that they have something to say about a particular case which is not already on the file.

The deciding officer took a very reasonable view in regard to that rule. As has been already stated, the reason for establishing the new rule was the fact that, in the vast majority of cases, the Deputies who came to visit the deciding officer did not present any new evidence and their own time and that of the deciding officer was thereby wasted.

Deputy Norton suggested that there was almost an absolute prohibition of visits and I wish to repeat that that is not the case. All that is required is that Deputies should give reasonable evidence in advance in one way or another that they have something new to say and that they can give information which they can stand over in regard to a case, and then the deciding officer will be glad to see them when the case comes up for decision. There is no comparison with the fact that an old age pension case raised as a Parliamentary Question is taken out of its chronological order, since Questions are negligible in number, whereas half of the cases for old age pensions appealed to the Minister were the subject of representation in one form or another, either written or verbal.

Deputy Norton suggested that we should make some kind of arbitrary decision in distinguishing between what he described as "pensions peddlers" and responsible members of the Dáil. We felt that, on the whole, it would be much better to establish a new rule, in order to see how the new rule would work, to examine the general administration of the Appeals Section in a sympathetic and liberal way and, in considering the application of the rule, to be reasonable. We believed that that would be a far better way than the making of an arbitrary decision. It would be impossible for the deciding officer to make such a decision, as he would not know who was a "pensions peddler" and who had a genuine reason for visiting the officer. We cannot recognise administratively, by way of regulation, the existence of a "pensions peddler" but we do like to have a regulation, whereby Deputies who really can give useful evidence in old age pensions appeals can visit the deciding officer without taking up too much of his time.

On the whole, we have had many satisfactory expressions in regard to this new regulation and very few complaints. I should add, in conclusion, that very many of the Deputies who formerly visited the Department have not in many cases even written letters to us in regard to the appeal cases, indicating that the habit had grown up—of course, without any malice aforethought—of making visits which were unnecessary.

In regard to turf production, Deputy Cosgrave suggested that he was not very certain as to the cost of production by local authorities. The last figure I have is 33/10 per ton over an average period of three years, and I may add that that price has not adversely affected the price to consumers. In other words, the price at which turf was sold by local authorities to Fuel Importers Limited has not been an important factor in raising the cost to the consumer. There have been other factors, but that is not a factor of major importance. The cost of turf, as Deputies know, varies enormously, having regard to various factors—the efficiency of labour, the over-burden in the bog which has to be removed, the material which has to be used, the width of the bog face, the accessibility of the bog and the length of the road to the bog. I have seen no complaint from Leix-Offaly that there have been inadequate funds for the improvement of bog roads in the area. I cannot, therefore, inform Deputy Davin that we have examined the matter and I would suggest that he make representations to us and give specific details in regard to the bogs where he claims that the roads were in poor condition.

Deputy Davin referred to turf remaining on the bog. As the Minister has stated, a considerable tonnage remained there from last year's production, and at present a considerable number of workers in excess of last year are engaged in removing that turf from the bogs for delivery to Fuel Importers Limited, or other institutions. In regard to the complaint of lack of transport for bog workers, I have seen no complaint in my Department in regard to this matter so far as Leix and Offaly counties are concerned. Here again, the Deputy should give specific details. I may add that turf production in Leix and Offaly, generally speaking, is fairly well advanced.

Deputy Davin referred to wages for turf workers in Leix and Offaly and made a comparison between the wages paid by local authorities and by the Turf Development Board. It has already been stated by the Minister that there can be no real comparison. The workers in the great turf camps in Kildare and elsewhere are drawn from outside the area and the conditions are entirely different. They leave their families and it was considered necessary to offer them a special inducement. The wages of other turf workers and of road workers should bear some relation to the wages of agricultural workers, and there have been adjustments, throughout the emergency whereby increases have been granted and sanctioned. In Leix-Offaly, the wages paid to turf workers are among the highest paid in the State. The figure for Leix is 48/- and for Offaly 54/-, as compared with an average of 42/-. I should add that workers have not been willing to do piece work in Leix. If they had been willing to do piece work, they could have earned higher wages. In some counties piece work is popular, while in others it cannot be popularised.

I wish to advert to the question of sworn inquiries. It appears to me that they are initiated sometimes on very trivial grounds. I do not know how the Minister satisfies himself that there is a prima facie case made for such an inquiry. Where a medical man or an official is concerned, it is a very serious matter from the point of view of cost. Obviously, a man in such a position must be on his mettle from the word “go.” These inquiries are long, expensive and tedious. The inspector generally appears to have very wide powers and it sometimes happens when a matter is raised which appears to be outside his terms of reference that he feels he has authority to chase that matter any distance. A man who is watching his interests, if he is a medical officer to an institution, has to incur substantial expense in defending himself over a very long period.

What is more unsatisfactory still is that the inspector's report is not published, or is not available to the individual. The Minister may say that it may often be in the interests of the individual that the report should not be published, and I agree with that view; but I think that such a report, if it is to be impartial, and ensure that justice is done in every case, should be available at least to the individual concerned. If the decision of the Minister is that the man is to go, he generally gets the opportunity of resigning instead of being dismissed. Surely, the Minister appreciates, in that case, that the individual has not an option, as a married man is forced to resign, since he must think of his family, and cannot run the risk of losing a pension. I think the system is highly unsatisfactory, and is not fair to the individual concerned. Especially where an inquiry is initiated on what, from my knowledge of a few of such inquiries, are trivial grounds, the individual or individuals concerned have to incur considerable expense, and have no possible hope of recovering the cost.

As regards an inquiry that lasts for a considerable period, it must be remembered that the cost has to be borne by the local authorities, so that it is unsatisfactory from many points of view. The Minister should satisfy himself that there is a prima facie case for any such inquiry. No inquiry should be initiated unless the Minister is absolutely satisfied that there are sound grounds for it. In instituting an inquiry the Minister should have some regard for the interests of the individual or individuals concerned and the expense that will be incurred in defending their positions or actions. Recently an inquiry was held in the city of Dublin and the Minister dissolved the board of the Cork Street Fever Hospital. Judging by the letter written by members of the board and the evidence submitted to the inspector, it would appear that the members were quite satisfied and felt quite confident that the report could not be adverse so far as they were concerned, and they have called for its publication. I quite understand that the Minister can give reasons why the report should not be published, but I think the House should satisfy itself, as the supreme authority in the State, that justice is being done in all cases.

The Deputy can put down a motion to discuss that matter, if he wants to.

Surely we are entitled to discuss the matter on this Vote?

Why assume that justice is not being done?

If the Minister will allow me——

If the Deputy is prepared to take the assurances of these six or seven gentlemen at their face value, and stand over them here, then he should put down a motion and discuss the whole thing.

The Minister will have an opportunity of replying to me. I am in possession now and I do not want any interruptions. I say this House should satisfy itself that justice is being done. I do not think the system is satisfactory. I submit that if the report cannot be published, then a committee of the House should be set up and the report should be submitted to that committee and the House should satisfy itself that the decision taken in relation to this matter is satisfactory.

The public mind must be satisfied that there was justification for the dissolution of the board. I can assure the House that the public generally, judging by the evidence submitted to the inquiry, the attitude of members of the board, and the information otherwise available, are not satisfied that there was any justification for the dissolution of the board. I feel there is a responsibility on the House to investigate this matter. I want to be helpful. If the Minister has satisfied himself that he has done the right thing, then I do not see why he should have any objection to putting the whole matter confidentially before a committee of the House. Judging by the correspondence and the evidence, I feel the situation is unsatisfactory. I do not want to go beyond that.

I wish to refer to the selection of tenants for labourers' cottages. I think the present method of selection is unsatisfactory. The decision as to the tenant of a cottage is made purely from the health point of view, and that is not enough in rural Ireland. I submit there is an agricultural aspect to be considered. When the Labourers Acts were introduced, and tenant farmers were asked to contribute to the provision of cottages, the compensation offered them for doing so was that they would be provided with good workers, contentedly housed. If a farmer has a cottage on his land and is anxious to secure a good workman, he often finds that a family is put into the house purely for health reasons, and that the man is not a good agricultural worker. I am not saying it is a simple matter to deal with, and I am not suggesting that families living in bad conditions should not be better housed. But I am looking at the agricultural aspect and the need to provide good agricultural workers suitably situated from the point of view of their work, and not having to travel too far. That is a point that ought not to be overlooked.

In the past, local authorities, in selecting tenants for cottages, generally took that aspect into account. We hear talk about increasing agricultural production. A very important constituent in that connection is the labour element. If we are to allocate labourers' cottages without any regard for agricultural qualifications in the tenant, then all I can say is that the Minister is not helping agricultural production. There should be some co-ordination in this matter. There could be better co-ordination in the Minister's Department between the sections dealing with public health and the poor law. Absence of co-ordination in a matter that is common to various Departments is evident here, and it is quite clear to me that there is absence of co-ordination in the selection of tenants for cottages.

I do not want to magnify the problem, but I have had experience of very unsatisfactory results. Many people have complained bitterly to me that they made representations to the county manager, or the county secretary, without result. They were farmers anxious to secure a good worker as a tenant. Among the applicants were excellent men of that type, but these excellent men were turned down, and, from a purely health point of view, a family was put into possession. The Minister should give that matter the attention it deserves. By no means is it a minor matter.

The Minister promised to bring in a pension scheme for road workers and I would like to know if it is his intention to implement his promise before the end of the year. In connection with road workers and agricultural workers, I would like to say there is no analogy between the conditions of the road workers and the agricultural workers because many of the county councils allow the road workers off at the busy time in spring and during the harvest to help the farming operations. The farm labourer is entitled to the wages and privileges which the ordinary road worker receives, and I hope the Minister will consider granting some increase in the wages of these men, because they are not whole-time employees.

I should like to see greater co-operation between the medical section of the Minister's Department and the sanitary authorities in relation to infectious diseases. I do not suggest that that section and the county medical officers of health do not have consultations, but I know one sanitary authority which is very perturbed about a serious epidemic of infectious disease in a particular area for the past two years. It is alleged that it may be due to carriers or to some cause other than those which they know, and everything humanly possible has been done to eliminate the disease, but their efforts have not been very successful up to the present. I should like to see the Department getting into closer touch with the sanitary authority, with a view to seeing whether, with the co-operation of both parties, anything can be done which has not already been done to eliminate the disease.

I should like to pay a tribute to those responsible for the improvement of bog roads. A large sum of money is being spent in my county and very good results have been achieved with benefit to the farming community. In regard to housing, no public representative at present takes a Party attitude in relation to the selection of tenants. It is all left to the medical officer of health, who recommends to the county manager the person whom he considers is most in need of a particular house. I have never known any county manager to give a house to any tenant other than the tenant recommended by the county medical officer, but in County Wicklow the land is very highly valued and, while a farm of £25 valuation might appear to be a ranch to a man from the West of Ireland, a man on such a farm is unable to live without assistance from the local authority in the form of employment with his horse and cart on the road.

I know large numbers of these men who are living with their families in houses condemned by the medical officer. They are not in a position to get a grant from the Government or to secure money from the banks and they have not got the money themselves for the erection of a house, and I suggest that some scheme be devised, in co-operation with the Department of Agriculture, whereby houses for these people will be provided. Grants will not be given to persons of more than £25 valuation; but such persons must obtain other work to supplement their earnings from the land. I am aware of tubercular sufferers residing in some of these houses, with no hope or prospect of ever being able to erect a house for themselves, and I hope the Minister will try to devise a scheme, in co-operation with the Department of Agriculture, which will meet the position of men on small holdings who are unable to erect houses for themselves.

With regard to roads, the construction of the coast road to the Silver Strand and Brittas in Wicklow was postponed for the emergency, but the whole scheme is ready and only requires the putting to work of men with concrete and so on. The land has been purchased, so that eventually people from the city will be able to travel along the sea coast from Bray to the Silver Strand and Brittas and on to Arklow and Courtown. I hope that, when the winter period comes, grants will be made available to enable the public bodies to complete this road.

The Minister has talked, for propaganda purposes, about the County Management Act. I have nothing to say against the managers, who have a very difficult task. I know that the managers in the counties bordering on Wicklow are excellent men, endeavouring to do the best they can to carry out the Act and realising that they have too much power, while public representatives have very little power, notwithstanding what the Parliamentary Secretary may say. As I say, I have no complaint to make against them, but I am sure the Minister has received, even from his own Party, representations with regard to the position of public men, to the effect that they are not now in as close touch as formerly with the Local Government Department. Members of public bodies are not now made aware of the correspondence which passes between a public body and the Department, other than whatever information they can get from the condensed reports in the minutes submitted to them, and I should like to see greater co-operation between the Department and these public representatives.

Prior to the passage of the Act, there were visiting committees for the various hospitals. These do not exist now, except in respect of mental hospitals, and I suggest that an amendment of the law be made to enable members of boards to act on visiting committees for the inspection of various hospitals under their care, and to report to the manager—not to be busybodies—on matters which call for attention or which require improvement.

I know a committee appointed in connection with home assistance which has done very excellent work in many cases, because the members have local knowledge and are able to bring to the attention of the manager the people who may require assistance and also the people who may be receiving what they should not receive.

With regard to the free boots scheme, there is a complaint that while the manager distributes, and a particular shopkeeper accepts, the vouchers, a number of people are at present without boots because the shopkeeper was unable to supply them. The time of the voucher has expired and is returned to the manager and the people get no boots. That is not the fault of the public body, but the fault of the merchant who accepted vouchers for the supply of boots which he had not in stock and which he was not able to procure from Dublin merchants. I hope arrangements will be made to ensure that, when vouchers are accepted, an adequate supply of boots will be available.

I appeal to the Minister to implement the promise he made in connection with officials employed by county councils and urban councils and to grant them their pension rights.

In my constituency we had turf workers on piece work with a bonus after a certain number of yards of turf had been produced. I think that the cost of cutting turf per ton or per cubic yard, on that basis, was much less than the figure given by the Parliamentary Secretary. If a bonus were promised at the present time, I think that, in many cases, you are going to have the turf cutting finished by the 31st May. If it were extended to the end of June I feel that very good results would be obtained. I hope that the Minister will give attention to the question I raised about the Silver Strand road.

I am sorry, but I was called upon to conclude the debate, and I allowed the Parliamentary Secretary to deal, on my behalf, with a number of matters that were raised.

It is all right.

When I called upon the Minister to conclude he gave way to Deputy Everett. At the time, other Deputies were not in the House. Would the Minister like to permit them to speak now?

There is supposed to be a time table.

We cannot always be watching these matters. There are a few things that I want to raise on this Estimate. The first is the manner in which tenants are appointed to labourers' cottages when they become vacant. I think it is highly desirable that only the proper type of tenant should be provided. These cottages were built for agricultural workers. You are not going to get labourers into these houses who will work for the farmers in a district by picking out some person who is living in a hovel on the side of the road and who, in the doctor's opinion, should get a house. I suggest to the Minister that some definite change should be made in that method of appointment when cottages become vacant. An appeal was made to the Minister by the Cork Corporation in connection with the rents fixed for the Spangle Hill houses. The appeal for a reduction in these rents was refused. I now ask the Minister to reconsider the matter. Undoubtedly the rents fixed were too high, and are not such as the tenants can afford to pay. I also desire to call the Minister's attention to the position in regard to the non-municipal houses. A purchase scheme was passed through this House under which a local authority could give a 25 per cent. reduction on labourers' cottages that were being purchased. Owing to a certain reactionary element that existed on the South Cork Board of Assistance they gave a reduction of only 10 per cent. in respect of the purchase scheme which they passed. Under these purchase schemes, when a man takes over his house, he also takes over responsibility for the cost of repairs to it, so that the 10 per cent. reduction is not sufficient at all. The matter was reviewed by the board of health about nine months ago, when they unanimously decided to ask the Minister to review the purchase scheme, at the same time recommending that the 25 per cent. reduction be given in the case of a new purchase scheme. Since then we have not heard from the Minister although that is a pretty long time ago.

I would like to know, as regards sub-heads J (4), J (5) and J (6), what is the basis on which the Minister makes the allocations. He told us here some time ago that some counties did not use the full amount of money allocated. We in Cork find we never have enough money. The first year the grants were given we used the full amount that we got. In the following year the Minister reduced the amount allocated to the South Cork Board of Assistance. Roughly, the position is that the three schemes mean an extra charge on the ratepayers of between £8,000 and £9,000 a year, or an extra 3½d. in the £ on the rates. I suggest to the Minister that the section of his Department which is responsible for making those allocations should take that into consideration, because the present position seems a rather funny one. It is rather strange that one area which uses the full amount of money allocated to it should have that allocation reduced in the following year, while you have other counties which do not use the full amount that they get.

I think it is unfair to throw a burden such as I have mentioned on the ratepayers of a county. If we are asked to pay 25 per cent., 50 per cent. or even the whole of it we are prepared to do our part in looking after our people, but when there is a sum allocated out of the general taxation of the country for this particular purpose, I claim that we are entitled to our share of it, and I think the Minister should take steps to see that we get our share.

With regard to sub-head J (5)—the provision of supplementary allowances to certain old age pensioners—I do not think the provision that the Minister is making for that purpose is large enough. I think he should see that sufficient money is provided to meet this expenditure. We had a most alarming statement made by the county manager in our area when we questioned him on that. It practically amounted to this, that one old age pensioner had to die before the extra 2/6 could be paid to another old age pensioner, and that the home assistance supervisors had to go over the lists again and again to see where they could find one man that was not quite as badly off as another, so that they could cut off the former in order to provide for the man who was more badly in need, even though the man who was cut off needed the money very badly. That is all due to the fact that sufficient money is not provided.

I was at a meeting of the South Cork Board of Assistance yesterday when I had 15 cases to bring up that were cut off within the past fortnight. The only excuse given by the county manager for cutting them off was that he had not the money. We are prepared to pay our 25 per cent. at any time, but we say it is the duty of the Department concerned to allocate sufficient money to meet this expenditure. We know that before a man gets the full amount of the old age pension—the 10/- a week—he is visited by an official from the Revenue Department who asks him how many hens and chickens he has, and if he has grown an acre of beet. That, surely, is trial enough for a man before he is given the full amount of the old age pension, an old man who has spent his whole life in this country working on the land and who is now 70 years of age and is perhaps crippled with rheumatism. He is able to do nothing except sit at home in the corner. I say that men like him should get their 10/- a week, and that there should be no more noise about it, especially when they pass the test that all those applicants have to go through. I think that every Deputy in the House, including the Minister, will admit that it is a hard test. In view of that, those old age pensioners who have got the 10/- should get the other 2/6 without any more noise about it. Give them that, instead of having officials paid by the ratepayers going around like a press gang inquiring about these matters.

I freely admit that the social services we have got are a great advantage to the poor, and that by the introduction of legislation of that kind the Minister has done great work for the poor. But why not provide sufficient money to meet the other cases? The officials have a tough job and a full time job in looking after their duties in the different areas without having to enter into a kind of family inquisition to know whether an old man should get an extra 2/6 weekly in his pension. I consider that it is grossly unfair to have an inquisition of that kind. I can give the Minister an instance, that of a road worker earning £2 a week, who has a wife and three children. His father is an old age pensioner and lives in the same house. That road worker never gets employment for a full 52 weeks, because there is not sufficient money provided for that period. I calculate that he gets 30 or 35 weeks' work in the year. In that case the old age pensioner could not get the extra 2/6, the manager holding that he was not entitled to it. When the Minister knows that a local authority is prepared to do the decent thing by the poor, and to give the extra amount in cases of this kind, why does the Department cavil about the extra amount? When money is allocated why does the Department not see that it is allocated fairly? If it was the Minister could not come to the House and state that there were counties in which the full amount of money available for this purpose had not been availed of. I mentioned the attitude of Cork Board of Assistance. That body is prepared to implement every piece of social legislation passed through this House. It is also prepared to pay its share of the expenditure, but it is not prepared to differentiate between the position of people with £1 a week and others who may have more for pension purposes. That is an unfair test, and I hope the Minister will take steps to remedy the position.

As the matter has been raised by Deputy Hughes, and as it is of very great importance, I should like to deal first with the question of sworn inquiries. Next to intelligent supervision on the part of members of local authorities of the operations of their officers, and particularly of their senior officers, I have no better instrument whereby I can discharge my responsibility for seeing that our local ratepayers get the efficient, honest, and clean administration to which they are entitled, than that of a sworn inquiry. So far as I am concerned I have never ordered or granted a sworn inquiry unless I was satisfied that a prima facie case existed for it. But, as I recognise that members of a local authority have great responsibility to their constituents, wherever a majority of the members of a public authority, or wherever a significant number of members of a local authority, ask for a sworn inquiry and make a prima facie case for it I am prepared to grant it.

In granting it, I am not concerned with individuals. I am concerned with standards. I am concerned to ensure that the standard of local administration in this country will be high and clean. While it is regrettable that public officers should be put to trouble, inconvenience, expense, and worry, nevertheless, I am bound to take the view that, if their conduct is such as to create the impression in the mind of the elected, or of a section of the elected, members of their authority, that it is not all that it ought to be, then the responsibility for that must rest upon them. Whether it rests upon them finally or not is a matter that will be determined by the inquiry. As to the nature of the inquiry, the inquiry is not a trial. It is an investigation conducted by my officer to ascertain for me what the facts are, and upon the facts as he elicits them in the evidence, and upon my judgment of those facts, I come to a decision, because I, as Minister for Local Government, have the duty and responsibility of removing from office any officer or member of a local authority whose conduct, in my opinion, has been unsatisfactory. Therefore, I shall not agree to fetter myself in any way in regard to the manner in which I discharge the responsibilities which have been placed upon me by statute. If my conduct in relation to any sworn inquiry is open to question, it can be questioned on the Estimate for my Department, as it has been questioned, or by putting down a motion, which will give me an opportunity of discussing that particular matter isolated from the multitude of topics which generally arise on a debate on an estimate. I am perfectly satisfied that if, at any time, such a motion be put down, I shall be in a position to justify any action I may take in relation to a sworn inquiry.

I am sorry that in the course of his remarks on this matter, I interrupted Deputy Hughes. I interrupted him because I felt that he assumed, on the basis of a letter which had appeared in the Press, that I had acted without full and due consideration of all the evidence in relation to an inquiry which was recently held. I have in my hand a letter which was written to the commissioner whom I appointed to conduct the affairs of a board which was dissolved as the result of a sworn inquiry. This letter, as the Deputy will see, consists of 39 typed foolscap pages, in which the whole of the evidence is reviewed very carefully, and in which are set out a number of matters which, in my view, justify the action which I took.

Since the matter has been raised, I shall send the Deputy a copy of this letter and I shall then ask him whether, in his opinion, my action was fully justified or not, and to say that, at least, I gave a bona fide decision—an impartial decision, and one given in good faith. He may regard my decision as severe but my general policy in relation to public administration and the local authorities is to exact a high standard. My standard in relation to local administration is a very high one. I am the only person who has any power, ultimately, to compel officers of local authorities and members of public bodies to discharge their duties to the public and if, as a result of an inquiry of this sort, I come to the conclusion that their conduct is not all that it should be, I can deal with them only severely. The higher their status and the more responsible their office—I regard members of a public authority as carrying greater responsibilities than any one of their officers—the more severe must be my decision in regard to them. There is no other way than that by which the general public can be protected in relation to those matters of local administration. Let me refer to one or two matters which did emerge in the course of this inquiry:

"The next matter which was the subject of investigation was the arrangement made for the painting of the exterior woodwork of the hospital and nurses' home. In May, 1944, tenders for painting the exterior hospital buildings were received from two contractors. One of the tenders amounted to £566 and the other to £944 5s. 3d. The board then decided to obtain further tenders but, instead of readvertising the work, they invited quotations from five other firms, three of whom submitted tenders. On further consideration, they then decided to accept the tender for £944 5s. 3d. When they were requested to submit the reasons why the firm which submitted the lower tender of £566 could not carry out the work properly, it was stated by the board that the decision was taken on the advice of a member of the board who was of opinion that, in order to carry out the work for the price quoted, it would be necessary to use paint of inferior quality. The main fact which emerged from the evidence at the inquiry was that the board sought quotations from firms which had made no response to the public advertisements inviting tenders for the work. That course was very irregular. Such a practice, if generally adopted, would undermine the basis of competitive tendering. When the board were not satisfied with the tenders originally received and further quotations were required, the work should have been readvertised. Mr. Litton, in his evidence, stated that, when it was intended to give the contract to the higher tenderer, he proposed that it should be deferred so that, before accepting the higher tender, the board could, at least, make inquiries as to the capacity and reputation of the contractor whose tender was the lower. It appears from Mr. Litton's evidence that his proposal was turned down, although he states that there is no record of his proposal in the minutes of the board. When the proposal of the board to give the contract to the higher tenderer was not sanctioned, the board finally accepted the lower tender. On the evidence submitted at the inquiry, the Fever Hospital Board did not act properly in accepting the higher tender in the first instance. Had full discretion in this matter rested with the board, it is evident that the funds of the board would have had to meet an extra charge of, approximately, £370. In the case of a contract for general maintenance work, which was also investigated at the inquiry, the board selected the second lowest tender. There were, apparently, no steps taken to ascertain whether the contractors who submitted the lowest tender would carry out the work at the amount specified by them. It was stated in evidence that they had omitted to provide for certain works and had not included a sum for contingencies. None of the tenders obtained by the board had reference to priced bills of quantities. A schedule of prices only was required in connection with the work and, in the circumstances, it was improper for the board to proceed to the acceptance of a tender without ascertaining whether the contractors who submitted the lowest tender were prepared to carry out the works for the bulk sum specified by them. The position was further aggravated by the fact that the contractors whose high tender was accepted were allowed an addition of 10 per cent. to their tender to cover increases in cost of materials. If such a concession was sought by one contractor, it should not have been granted without first ascertaining whether or not the contractors who submitted tenders would demand a like addition. The board's action was improper. As in the case already referred to, the board showed a disposition to allocate work to a particular firm without due examination.

Moreover, the evidence showed that in addition to the allowance of 10 per cent., granted by the board to cover the increase in cost of materials, the contractors were asked to undertake extra works, some on the basis of time and cost of materials, with the result that the total expenditure exceeded the original contract amount by about 50 per cent."

Now, there are other matters which are dealt with in this report. I notice here an editorial which appeared in the Evening Mail for Saturday, 19th May, under the heading “Secret Findings”. The findings were only secret because this newspaper—and other newspapers —which published the letter of the board, and which wrote this editorial, did not ask for a copy of this letter, did not publish the findings, and did not publish the arguments upon which the findings were based. I am not responsible for the fact that certain newspapers in this country are quite prepared to suppress and to censor any evidence that may come before a sworn inquiry. Even though these newspapers have been declaiming against the censorship that was imposed all through the emergency, they themselves are quite prepared to censor and suppress significant matters of that kind, and then they are quite prepared to come out and write this sort of dishonest editorial.

However, as I have said, Sir, I regard the present procedure of a sworn inquiry, even though it is not altogether perfect and might be simplified, as the only instrument which I have, next to that of expecting that the local authorities will, as I have said, exercise an intelligent supervision over the conduct of their officers—the only instrument that I have to ensure that the standard of local administration in this country will be high; and certainly, so far as I am concerned, and so far as I am Minister for Local Government, I will not consent to any attempt to fetter me in my judgment of the evidence elicited at these sworn inquiries in regard to the conduct of any officials or members of a public body.

Will the Minister say if the report was made available to the public?

It was sent to the commissioner, and was probably available to the Press, if they wanted to secure it.

Deputy Cosgrave, in the course of his remarks, asked me a number of questions, some of them relating to housing, others relating to roads, and others relating to the cost of turf production by local authorities. Deputy Childers has dealt with Deputy Cosgrave's queries in relation to roads and turf production. The other matter on which Deputy Cosgrave wanted to have information was the extent to which the Department hoped to deal with the housing problem during the year. Well, I think that our hopes in regard to this matter cannot have any very substantial basis, in view of the highly uncertain position relating to the question of supplies, but on page 10 of the White Paper, entitled "The Post-War Building Programme," which has been issued, Deputy Cosgrave will see that we believe that if things become anything like normal in the first year, the total expenditure upon local housing will reach a figure of about £2,500,000, but we do say, in relation to that, that the industry will be taxed to the limit of its capacity to get materials and labour personnel on a scale that will enable us to meet even pre-war building requirements, and, on the other hand, the difficulty of obtaining materials is particularly great in regard to timber, steel, glass, window frames and so on. That may also be true in relation to materials such as cement in the production of which coal plays a very important part. However, the general position in relation to supplies of certain critical building materials at this moment can be taken to be very unsatisfactory, and there is nothing that we can do to improve that position although we are making every effort possible to get supplies wherever they are available.

Deputy Cogan criticised my action in suppressing or abolishing the Kerry County Council. Well, as I said in my opening remarks, I thought I had been more than patient with that body. The Deputy himself had to admit that the methods they adopted were not such as he himself would have recourse to or could approve of. He, however, made the suggestion which, I can assure him, was unwarranted, that they had been abolished by me because I was afraid of the results of the coming county council elections in Kerry. Now, I think that if the Deputy will recall what I said as to the attitude which was adopted by the Kerry County Council, he will realise that, so far from my desiring in any way to abolish them, they were looking to be abolished themselves, because they were afraid that when they went before their constituents, and had to give an account of their stewardship, and had to admit the failure of tactics which they had pursued over a considerable number of years in relation to the striking of the rates for the maintenance of the roads in Kerry, they would cut a very sorry figure indeed. Now, if the Kerry County Council had been in earnest; if they had really, genuinely and sincerely wanted to have the question of the road administration in Kerry investigated, it was their duty to have the estimate considered, but they refused to consider it; they did not even look at the estimate or at the county-at-large charges. They simply said: "We will not consider the estimate until a special engineer is sent down and we have an inquiry into local administration." If they had taken the other line, if they had been bona fide in their attitude, they knew that they would have been treated with the utmost tolerance and patience by me.

They had been given special facilities, special grants in the previous year, to help them to deal with the serious problem presented by the fact that the roads in Kerry had so seriously deteriorated as to be impassable in some cases. I got a county engineer from a neighbouring county to make an inspection of the roads, and I sent down my chief engineering adviser to them last year. I showed them much more patience, at any rate, than I am generally gifted with. I told them that I was giving them a last chance, that they had to conduct themselves as a responsible public authority or they would not be there. This year with that knowledge in their minds they refused, as I have said, even to consider the estimate that had been submitted to them by the manager. The manager pointed out to them that they were bound to consider it. I have no doubt whatever that if they considered that estimate as reasonable men, they would have been able to suggest some works which might have been omitted, and they would have been able to strike a rate, which, while no doubt it would be heavy, nevertheless would be lower than the manager's original estimate might seem to call for. But they took up the attitude of doing nothing.

If they took up a reasonable attitude and struck a rate, they could have asked for an investigation. I am not satisfied that a further investigation was necessary, because we had already sent down at the beginning of the year one of the principal engineers from the Department, who had gone over the ground with the newly-appointed county surveyor, an official who came to that county with a considerable reputation, an official who, I understand, is a very highly qualified engineer, with a great deal of experience behind him. I am perfectly satisfied that if the council had co-operated with him, that so far as his efforts backed up by their support could secure it, there would have been a considerable improvement in the administration of the roads in Kerry. But, as I said, they took up the attitude of going on strike, and of saying they would do nothing. The reason they said that was, that having my warning in their minds, they knew there was nothing left for me except to abolish them and to put in a commissioner to administer the affairs of the county. That commissioner will remain there until we have cleared up the mess which the abolished county council has left us, and until we get a proper local administration going in Kerry. That will not be easy, but that is the result, at any rate, that I am trying to secure.

Another point raised by Deputy Cogan had reference to the circular regulating the access to the old age pensions appeals officer which Deputies of this House enjoyed. The Parliamentary Secretary has already dealt very fully with that matter. I do not intend to go into it in any detail. Deputy Cogan wanted to know whether the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary had direct access to the appeals officer, and implied that I as Minister, Deputy Childers as Parliamentary Secretary on that side of the Department, and Deputy Ward as Parliamentary Secretary to whom my functions as Minister for Public Health have been delegated, had special facilities for dealing with the appeals officer which we were denying to other members of the House. I should like to deny that very strongly and categorically. I have been a member of this House for almost 18 years. In the whole of that period I do not think I have been called upon to make representations to the old age pensions section of the Department or the appeals officer in more than half-a-dozen cases. I have never, since I became Minister for Local Government, even seen the appeals officer. So far as I am concerned, what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and if I had received any representations in regard to an old age pensions appeal, I would simply pass them on and allow my officer to deal with it in a judicial, impartial and just way, as I would expect him to deal with any representations that might be made to him by any Deputy in this House.

A number of Deputies, including Deputy Allen, Deputy Bartley and Deputy Norton, raised the question of the assistance which was likely to be given in future to local authorities to enable them to carry out housing schemes. Deputy Norton said we should inform local authorities whether the subsidy will be on the full cost of the houses as that cost now stands or only a fraction of it. The position is that the Minister for Finance and the Government cannot come to any final conclusion at this stage as to what subsidy would be required, in the circumstances as they will exist when supplies become normal, but we are determined, if we can, in our time to solve the housing problem, or at least to give local authorities every inducement to solve it, to go ahead and to build new houses where they are required within a reasonable period.

The question as to what the subsidy is going to be is, therefore, very largely academic; because local authorities can go ahead, get materials and can prepare their plans now and whenever the Government comes to a final decision in relation to this matter, we may be almost certain that it will be made retrospective to cover the present abnormal circumstances and that no local authority will eventually be the loser by anticipating that final decision. Apart altogether from that, I do not think there is any reason why there should be any hold-up in the preparation at least of plans for housing projects. The supply position at the moment, as was pointed out to Deputy Cosgrave, is not satisfactory but we know it will not always be unsatisfactory. So long as it is local authorities can be making their plans well in advance. They can be securing sites, drafting schemes and getting ahead with other preliminaries, and by the time these are completed we shall, no doubt, have crystallised our minds fully in the matter and will be able to come to a definite decision in regard to it. In the meantime, as I have said, the interest of any local authority which proceeds now in anticipation of the provisions of the new comprehensive housing measure, which will undoubtedly have to be introduced, need not be damnified by the fact that it has gone ahead, because, as I have said, the provisions of that Bill will be probably made retrospective to cover the present abnormal circumstances.

Deputy Fogarty advocated that the provisions of the School Meals Act, as it is popularly known, which is confined to the urban areas, should be extended to rural areas. Unfortunately, that does not lie at this moment within my power because to extend the scope of the Act would require new legislation and I am not in a position to introduce that legislation at this stage but the matter is undoubtedly being kept in mind. At the same time we have to remember that we cannot go to the stage at which the burden of feeding every child at school is to be thrown on the State. Though hard cases make bad law, we shall have to find some other means of dealing with that problem than by merely extending the School Meals Act.

Deputy Fogarty is also under the impression that home assistance officers take children's allowances into account, and he mentioned that he knew an officer who did take the children's allowances into account, in determining the amount of assistance which might be given to a particular family. In regard to that matter, specific instructions have already been issued to public assistance authorities stressing that it would be entirely contrary to the spirit of the legislation in respect of children's allowances to take any such allowances into account for the special purpose of reducing home assistance. Now mark—they are not to take it into account for the special purpose of reducing home assistance. If they are satisfied that, for some other reason, the circumstances of the family have changed, the fact that they are in receipt of children's allowances is not going to be any bar against a reduction of home assistance. Though Deputy Fogarty may not have been aware of it, there may have been some significant change in the circumstances of the particular family to whom he was referring.

I was not here when Deputy Davin spoke, but I gather that he raised one or two points. He alleged that the county manager held up an appeal to the Minister regarding the nurses' conditions. All I can say in regard to that is that the county manager has not in fact submitted an appeal by the nurses and, therefore, the full facts are not known in my Department but I will have inquiries made into the Deputy's allegation. He also wanted to know what is being done to enable cottage plots to be fenced where the houses are not yet built. Where plots have been acquired or authorised to be acquired and where, owing to the emergency conditions, the cottages have not been built, it has been my policy to urge local authorities to fence the plots and, where possible, to make them available to the labourers for tillage. I understand that that is being generally done. Apparently, however, it is not being done in Laoighis-Offaly, and perhaps we shall have that matter investigated also.

Deputy Allen, in addition to raising the question of a subsidy for housing, raised the question of delays in providing certificates for house building grants and reconstruction grants. The position there is that the powers which we had to give building grants and reconstruction grants have lapsed but a new Bill is being prepared and we have decided to issue the certificates pending the Bill becoming law. Until that decision had been taken—the decision required a certain amount of consideration—there was some delay.

Since we have been dealing with the question of the grants which the Government has given for houses, it may not be without interest for the House to learn in what proportion the State and the local authorities contribute to the cost of these very valuable properties which the local authorities are acquiring. Since 1940 the State has accepted liability for no less than £1,532,770 out of a total expenditure of £7,085,000 for houses built under the Housing of the Working Classes Act. That is to say, the State has contributed 22 per cent. of the total cost. On the other hand, the local authorities have contributed only £1,187,000, or 17 per cent., of the total cost. The important thing to remember in that connection is that whereas the State has no right or title to the property, the houses will eventually become the property of the local authority.

Who contributed the balance?

The tenants. But do not let any member of a local authority forget the very significant fact that the houses eventually become the property of the local authority, that is to say, the ratepayers.

Of the tenants.

Of the ratepayers. These are houses built under the Housing of the Working Classes Act.

Has the Minister similar figures under the Labourers Acts?

They are slightly greater under the Labourers Acts. Out of £4,328,610 expended under the Labourers Acts, the State contributed £1,318,218; or 30 per cent., and the local authorities contributed £1,440,310, or 33? per cent. They are getting the houses at one-third of the cost. Deputy McCarthy mentioned that local authorities were slow in implementing the improved scales of salaries for nurses.

Would the Minister permit me to ask one question? He suggested that the tenant is contributing the difference in the cost after allowing for the 33? per cent and 30 per cent. Is he taking into account there the cost of repairs and maintenance?

I am afraid he is not, because the rent, generally, approximately covers the cost of repairs.

The rent paid by the tenants in general amounts to 36 per cent. With regard to the matter which was mentioned by Deputy McCarthy, I should like to say that it is not just to the local authorities to hold them responsible for the delay in giving effect to our circular. The circular was issued only at the end of November, and many local bodies could not give effect to the scheme until the extra cost had been provided for in the Estimates for 1945-46. Generally, I can say that there has been widespread compliance with the terms of the circular, particularly in the last few months, which is significant, because that is since the beginning of the present financial year.

Deputy Bartley asked me to speed up the planning of the new hospital for Galway. The position there is that the county manager and his consultant architect are being pressed to expedite the next stage of the plans. The work is recognised to be a very urgent one. The erection of the new regional hospitals, when the plans are fully prepared and finally approved, will rank with works which had first priority. I do not think I need deal very fully with most of the matters raised by Deputy Everett, except to say that the powers of public assistance authorities to appoint special committees of the nature referred to by him were pointed out in a circular which was issued soon after the coming into operation of the Management Act. With regard to the difficulty of which he complained in the operation of the footwear scheme in County Wicklow, of course it has to be remembered that it is a new scheme and we cannot expect it to operate with absolute smoothness right from the beginning. Above everything else we must always bear in mind in this connection that there was an absolute shortage of boots, and we could not make boots more readily and easily available than they were. Next year, after the experience of this year, I think matters will be more satisfactory.

Could the Minister say what traders who have boots on hand will do with them?

Are there any?

They will probably return them. Anyway, they will be available for next year, if nothing else.

They are tied up with them; they cannot sell them.

I am sure that can be arranged, if the Deputy will get some of them to take the matter up with the Parliamentary Secretary, Dr. Ward. Deputy Corry was very emphatic in wanting to know the basis upon which the grants made under sub-head J (4) were allocated. That is easily ascertained. If the Deputy will turn to page 183 of the Book of Estimates, he will read there: "J (4)— Grants towards the supply of assistance in kind to recipients of home assistance: The grants will be allocated to the local authorities in proportion to the number of home assistance recipients in their areas". There could be nothing fairer than that.

Would the Minister state how it is that he reduced that grant by about £20,000 odd in 1944 as against 1943?

Well, all I can say is that the numbers must have fallen in the Deputy's area. I have no power to vary this grant, or to vary the conditions upon which it is distributed. The Dáil provides the money on the basis that the grants will be allocated to the local authorities in proportion to the number of home assistance recipients in their areas. That is how it is done. With regard to sub-head J (6), if the Deputy will turn to the sub-head there he will read: "Grants to public assistance authorities not exceeding 50 per cent. of their approved net expenditure on the provision of footwear for certain children under the age of 16 years, whose parents or guardians are not in receipt of home assistance". We pay approximately 50 per cent. of the cost.

But you gave nothing—

Cork seems to be very unfortunate in this matter, because a sum of £20,000 was distributed somewhere.

It seems to be more than unfortunate.

With regard to J (5) —Grants towards the provision of supplemental allowances to certain old age pensioners and to certain blind pensioners—the position is that we are prepared to pay 75 per cent. of the total amount expended by Cork on the provision of those supplemental allowances, but we do say that the obligation rests on the Cork local authority to satisfy itself, before it grants a supplemental allowance, that the family circumstances justify the payment of that allowance. It does not matter whether a man is 70 years or 80 years, or how hard he has worked. What does matter in this connection is what are the circumstances of his children, who are bound to maintain him. If their circumstances are such as to justify a grant up to a sum not exceeding 2/6 a week, they may pay that grant, and we will defray 75 per cent. of the cost. But they must satisfy themselves, in fairness to their own ratepayers, that the family circumstances justify such a grant.

I should like to ask one or two questions. In anticipation of shortages of material for housing construction, such as timber, for some years to come, is the Department carrying out any research for the purpose of providing alternative materials?

My Department does not carry out research. It is not my job to carry out research. The Deputy is aware of the fact that a committee has been set up, under the auspices of the Minister for Supplies, to consider this whole question of finding substitute materials.

On the question of the sworn inquiry, where there is a prima facie case I am all with the Minister that an inquiry is necessary. The Minister has gone a long way to satisfy me, but I asked would the report be available to an individual in the case of an inquiry regarding the duties of an individual, or, in the case of a public body, would the report be published? In the recent case, the Minister suggested that the report was available for publication, but it was not published.

We must be careful about this. The inspector's report to me, which is accompanied by the minutes of evidence, is a confidential document. It is a report from a departmental official to his Minister, and it is a document of a kind which has long been protected by privilege. But what is available is this: the Minister sets out his findings, and the grounds upon which he arrived at them. That is available, and it is a voluminous document.

I should like to call the Minister's attention to a matter in connection with old age pensioners. I would call his attention to the statement made by the county manager to the board of health that though he had cases he was not able to get the money.

I am not responsible for those statements.

Vote put and agreed to.

If we could dispose of my Estimates to-night, it might not be necessary for the Dáil to meet tomorrow. Would that be agreed?

Agreed.

Top
Share