It is a pity that Deputy Byrne, having felt justified in raising this matter on the Adjournment, found it impossible to remain to hear the reply and to get the information which he claimed that he was seeking. Deputy Byrne asked a number of questions which had no bearing whatever on this subject and raised a number of points for which I have no responsibility whatever. The Deputy talked about the numbers of men likely to be demobilised from the Army, about their great coats, boots and their socks. He wanted to know what was to become of the great coats and boots. That is not a matter on which I could give Deputy Byrne or any other Deputy information. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle has pointed out that these things have no relation to the question which appeared on the Order Paper. I was anxious that Deputy Byrne should remain to hear what I have to say. He has shown his concern for the unemployed, and claims that he has always showed concern for that class. He asked me to indicate our proposals for dealing with the unemployment problem as it still exists, and as it may exist in a few months' time. The funny thing about all this is that while Deputy Byrne has shown such wonderful concern for the unemployed in Dublin, he has been a member of the Dublin Corporation, not for 12 months, but for many years, and apparently is not aware of the fact that there are four fairly major schemes approved by us since 1944-45, that have not yet been started by the Dublin Corporation, schemes that were sanctioned by us for the relief of unemployment in Dublin.
Of course it is all very well to come into the House and, if you like, use these unfortunate people, at 9 o'clock at night for the purpose of getting a little kudos, a little bit of publicity, and irritating the occupant of the Chair, when he has to tell the Deputy to sit down or he will have to remove himself from the House.
All these things, of course, get the headlines in the newspapers on the following morning. I was anxious that Deputy Byrne should remain in order that I would tell this member of the Dublin Corporation who has shown such concern for the unemployed and is so anxious to obtain information from me as to what we propose to do about those people, that I have four schemes here which were sanctioned in the year 1944-45, the total cost of which is estimated at £40,000, and that the Dublin Corporation, for one reason or another, and I suppose they had some reason, have not been able to start. Would not one think that Deputy Byrne would first go to the city council, of which he is a member, and raise this matter: that he would find out what schemes had been approved, what schemes had been started, what schemes have been completed, and ascertain the amount of the carry-over from 1944-45 to 1945-46 before coming into this House to start protesting and talking in the manner in which he has been speaking here to-night?
I want to tell him again, as I did to-day, the amount of money provided this year to meet this unemployment situation. I told him to-day that, while the unemployment figure was fairly substantial this year, it was lower this year and last year than it has been for any year since 1934. I told him that, of the £1,250,000 that had already been provided in the Estimates, a large portion of that had already been sanctioned, and that the remaining schemes were under way. I had no further information to give him, nor have I any further information to give him now.
If I were to discuss this whole matter of unemployment and the number of 62,000 whose names appear on the unemployed register, if I were to tell the House and the country all that I have come to know about what that number means—if I had the time at my disposal to do so—that number of 62,000 would present to this House and to the public a very different picture from the one that it does present.
I have instances in my office where schemes have been approved for small towns and villages in which, according to the unemployed register, a sufficient number of people were located to warrant the sanction of a grant, that immediately on that grant being approved and the county surveyor, whose responsibility it was to carry out the scheme and supervise the work, being notified, and immediately on his approach to the local labour exchange to recruit the men who were suitable for the work and were signing the register on the ground that they were unemployed, that they were seeking work, that they were able and willing to work; that on his approach to a number of those labour exchanges to implement the schemes that we had approved, he found 24, 25, 26, or 30 individuals registered there all making the claims that I have described, he discovered that these numbers had evaporated, and that, instead of 26 or 30 individuals, maybe two or three or four turned up for the work. I am not denying the fact that there is an unemployment problem, but I am denying and, as a matter of fact I could prove to the hilt if I had the time at my disposal to do so, that the problem is certainly not represented by the figures recorded at the different labour exchanges.
I have nothing further to add except to repeat that not only is the money to which I have referred there, not only have schemes for this city and many other boroughs been approved for this year, and not only are a great number of them in the hands of the city council or its officials; not only is that the situation this year in relation to the City of Dublin, but we have also four schemes estimated to cost £40,000 that were sanctioned for the year 1944-45 that have not yet been put in motion by the city council or its officials. Therefore, I suggest that before Deputy Alfred Byrne should see fit to raise a matter of this kind in the House he should make himself aware of the facts as I have explained them.
