Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 13 Jun 1946

Vol. 101 No. 13

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

Minister for Local Government and Public Health (Mr. MacEntee)

When progress was reported yesterday evening I was outlining the requirements of the various local authorities as disclosed in the housing survey which has just been completed, and giving the Dáil some indication of the immediate housing projects which these authorities had in contemplation.

I had dealt with Cork and I was proceeding to refer to the conditions in Limerick City. In that city the housing needs of the workers have been estimated at slightly over 2,000 dwellings. Plans for two schemes, comprising 42 houses, have been approved and sites for an additional 106 are being developed at present. In all, the Limerick Corporation have approved of the erection of 1,793 new houses. No doubt, in Limerick City progress has been somewhat hampered by reason of the fact that it has been without a permanent manager for some time. But this position is now remedied and I hope that we shall witness substantial housing activity there in the near future.

Waterford City will require 987 houses, and it has been proposed to erect 750 houses as soon as practicable. Plans for an initial scheme of 46 houses have been prepared and steps are being taken by the corporation to acquire approximately 62 acres for further building.

In order to reduce their immediate commitments in connection with postwar building, the attention of local authorities was specially directed by the Department to the importance of ensuring that working-class houses which, though at the moment unfit for human habitation, are capable of being rendered fit at a reasonable cost, are not allowed to become wholly incapable of repair. Many such houses could be rendered habitable by the execution of minor repairs.

Local authorities were urged to have the necessary work carried out in such cases. Surveys were made and records prepared of the houses to be dealt with. I am glad to say good progress was made on many houses requiring minor works. It was found, however, that, where extensive works are required, the persons having control of the houses are, in general, reluctant to carry them out, even with the assistance provided in urban areas under Section 5 of the Housing and Labourers Act, 1937, which, as the House may be aware, gives special grants for the reconstruction and repair of such houses. This reluctance, no doubt, is due to many factors, such as the scarcity of materials and the difficulty of procuring them, the increased cost of materials and labour, and the fact that no appreciable return is obtained for the expenditure incurred.

With regard to the general question of housing subsidies, I should say that at present it is not proposed to alter the existing standard subsidies payable under the Act of 1932. I have already told the House, however, that in order to meet the present abnormal level of costs, it is proposed to make, in addition to the standard subsidies, supplementary grants out of the transitional development fund.

The making of a supplementary grant in the case of any particular scheme will depend upon three factors: (i) that the tender it is proposed to accept for the erection of the houses is in all the circumstances reasonable; (ii) that the rents of new workers' dwellings will be fixed at a reasonable figure, having regard to the level of current wages in the area; and (iii) that the local authority concerned will make a reasonable financial contribution itself towards the solution of the problem.

Each application for a supplementary grant will be considered on its merits and with careful regard to the conditions I have mentioned. The grants will be generous, but will not be given unless they are clearly warranted. Reasonable tendering will be a sine qua non.

In the matter of timber supplies, every effort will be made to facilitate house building by the local authorities by making as much timber available to them as circumstances will permit. If, however, in particular cases houses cannot be completed at once owing to shortage of materials, local authorities will be encouraged to complete them as far as the supply of materials will allow, and the capital charges on the outlay will be borne by the transitional development fund until they are completed.

A most important factor in enabling the local authorities to proceed without hesitation with such housing plans as they have already prepared will be found in the fact that the rate of interest on loans issued to local authorities from the Local Loans Fund will, as already announced, be reduced from the present figure of 4¼ per cent. to 2½ per cent. The effect of this low rate of interest will be appreciated when I say that in the case of a house costing £800 and financed by a loan raised for 35 years the loan charges will be reduced by about 3/9 per week. Provided, therefore, the building industry co-operates in bringing down costs— and that applies to all sections, all interests connected with the industry— local authorities should be able to build houses to be let at reasonable rents.

During the emergency progress in regard to water supply and sewerage schemes was greatly retarded owing to the shortage of materials. On the other hand, however, local authorities were encouraged to formulate proposals and to proceed with the preparation of plans for the works most urgently needed in each sanitary district.

There are now 40 schemes fully approved or in such an advanced state of preparation that early approval may be anticipated. They comprise 21 water supplies at an estimated cost of £166,000 and 19 sewerage schemes of which the estimated cost is £240,000, making a total of £406,000 in all. The number of these schemes which can be undertaken during the coming year will depend on labour and materials being available and also on the financial capacity of the various local authorities.

An examination of the estimated cost of these schemes has established that the cost of water supplies and sewerage schemes is very much in excess of any figure which would have been regarded as reasonable and economic in pre-war years. This is largely due, of course, as the House will appreciate, to increased cost of labour, materials and plant.

Apart from these economic factors however, the simpler and more straightforward schemes have already been undertaken while those now under consideration present more complicated problems, such as widely scattered populations or difficult supply or out-fall conditions. Moreover in the case of water supplies it has been decided to keep well in mind the need for ensuring that the flow will be adequate for fire-fighting purposes. That was a consideration which was sometimes overlooked in the preparation of schemes in the past, but the need to take air raid precautions during the recent emergency has brought home to us all that it is a factor that must figure very largely in all our calculations in preparing water supply schemes for the future. The financial difficulties, which otherwise might be experienced by local authorities in undertaking these schemes, will be lightened considerably by the proposed reduction in the rate of interest on loans from the Local Loans Fund. Furthermore, as in the case of housing, supplemental grants will be given out of the transitional development fund where the cost of necessary and approved schemes is exceptionally high. As in the case of housing, each particular scheme will be considered on its merits and reasonable tendering and reasonable cost will be a sine qua non for any assistance, reasonable cost, of course, taking into account circumstances obtaining at present. I think, Sir, that disposes of all I have to say in relation to the Local Government side of my Department.

Turning now to the Public Health side of the Joint Department, I should like to give some statistics of births, deaths and marriages, subjects to which it has been customary to refer in these Estimates. The number of births, the House will be glad to note, has been rising during the past few years. In the year 1943 it was 64,375, in 1944, 65,425 and in 1945, 66,521. Corresponding to these figures the birth rates for the last three years were 21.85 per thousand of the estimated population in 1943; 22.22 in 1944 and 22.3 in 1945. Moreover, the number of marriages has also increased as compared with the last year. These gratifying facts lend no corroboration to Deputy O'Higgins's contention that the Government's policy "was breaking up our homes".

As regards deaths, there was a reduction in the number of deaths registered in the year 1945. During that year 42,823 people died, or 2,305 fewer than in 1944. The death rate per 1,000 of the estimated population in 1945 was 14.4, which was a reduction of .9 on the rate for the year 1944 and a reduction of .4 for the year 1943. I submit to the House that the trends for births, marriages and deaths are in remarkable concordance. Taken together, they are evidence of our national vitality and stand as a refutation of Deputy Hughes's allegation that "we have nothing to boast about." We can, at least, boast about these figures for their trend is in complete opposition to what was experienced under the Cumann na nGaedheal regime. Then the nation was dying; to-day it is alive and vigorous.

Mr. Hughes

You are responsible for that?

Mr. MacEntee

Our policy is responsible for that. As to the causes of death, I do not propose to dilate upon them so far as those attributable to the principal infectious diseases are concerned. There has been a decrease as compared with the previous year. Typhoid, for example, of which there were 193 cases fewer than in 1944, caused 32 deaths as against 58 in the previous year. Furthermore—and this is a very gratifying fact—during the last year no case at all of typhus fever occurred in this country.

The position in regard to infectious diseases being so much more satisfactory than last year, I should like to devote a little time to the subject of maternal and infantile mortality. With regard to maternal mortality, the final figures for 1945 are not yet available. The provisional figures for the year, however, show the number of deaths from pregnancy and child-birth for the year as 147, which is less than the total for 1944. On the provisional figures, the maternal death date per 1,000 births was the lowest so far recorded, being 2.2.

Mr. Roddy

It is not lower than those for 1930.

Mr. MacEntee

This death-rate compares favourably with 2.4, 2.3, and 2.5 for the years 1944, 1943 and 1942, respectively. The ten-year average from 1934 to 1943 was 3.7 per 1,000 births, but for the decennial period 1925-1934, it was no less than 4.6.

Infant mortality has also shown a decrease. The rate for 1945 for the whole country was 69, whereas during the year 1944 it was 79 and during 1943, 83. On the other hand, during the year 1944 the corresponding rates in neighbouring countries were:— Northern Ireland, 67; Scotland, 65, and England and Wales, 46. In the light of the figures which I have given it is clear that for us infant mortality is a major problem and one which must be tackled with all the resources at our command. The Public Health Bill, which has been so bitterly opposed by certain Parties in this House, contains many provisions which would be most helpful and, indeed, are essential in that regard.

In several counties the average death rate among infants falls below 50, and has been below this level for many years. Indeed, throughout rural Ireland generally, it might be said that in comparison with other countries the rate is not abnormally high. I am not suggesting that it is as low as it should be or that it is as low as we can make it, provided the Dáil will give us the necessary powers. These considerations make it clear that the excessive national death rate among infants is due to the number of deaths occurring in large cities and towns, particularly Dublin, where the rate per 1,000 births over a period of ten years has averaged no less than 104. The matter of the mortality among Dublin babies is of such importance to the whole nation that I propose to go into the subject in some detail. Since the contrast between the infant death rates existing in, say, some of our western counties, our poorest counties even, and that prevailing in Dublin is so great and has been so often pointed out, it is clear to me that much more strenuous efforts to improve the chances of life of infants in Dublin are necessary.

This problem has been studied exhaustively in my Department and certain conclusions have been reached. One of these is that the present organisation of the Maternity and Child Welfare Department of Dublin Corporation is inadequate to cope with the problem. The corporation service, I should explain, is mainly limited to advising and assisting mothers in the care of their infants. But for the welfare of babies, generally, so ill that they die in such numbers, much more is needed. They should have available night and day sufficient specialists in child diseases, hospital cots should be always ready to receive them, and, more important still, a visiting service should bring the specialists and the hospital cots into immediate relationship with the homes of babies, so that diseases to which they are subject can be treated in their early curable stages.

A scheme for extending and improving the maternity child welfare service in Dublin under the Dublin Corporation so as to provide these essentials, was prepared in my Department, prepared in association with the masters of the three lying-in hospitals of the city, whose boards of governors were also agreeable to the proposal. This scheme provides for a vastly extended visiting service, for clinics, for specialist treatment to be constantly available, and for a night and day emergency service.

The State is prepared to pay 50 per cent. of its annual cost and to allow the capital charges incurred by the hospitals to be recouped from the Hospitals' Trust Fund.

Now, let me stress in connection with this problem, that the matter of availability of treatment is of supreme importance. For example—and this perhaps will shock the House—during the last three years nearly six hundred babies died from various forms of pneumonia in Dublin alone. Yet, we have at our disposal, if we will avail of it, the scientific means of preventing as many as 80 per cent. of such deaths, if the organisation were there to see that the babies affected got the proper treatment. I must stress this because the scheme I have described was sent to the corporation in the beginning of March. I regret to say that so far it has been neither accepted nor rejected, nor has any reasonable alternative been submitted. Yet, the terrible infant death roll in the city continues to grow.

Three or four years ago the Department was faced with a very serious problem in the mortality which was ensuing among infants from gastroenteritis. Enteritis, I am sorry to say, continues to be a dreadful scourge. We are instituting a further inquiry into the prevention and causation of this disease which has caused almost 2,500 infant deaths in Dublin during the last five years. The Dáil will recall that four years ago the Parliamentary Secretary (Dr. Ward) organised a Commission of Inquiry into this disease, manned by the leading medical scientists of our country. Subsequently, St. Clare's hospital for enteritis was established, likewise on his initiative. Since November, 1944, when it first opened its doors, 1,300 cases of this deadly disease have been treated in the hospital, and there are many children in the city to-day who owe their lives to it.

We hear a great deal about the loss which the nation sustains when our citizens emigrate across the sea. But the stark fact is that our losses year by year through preventable disease are a much greater drain upon our vitality and upon our wealth than anything we suffer by the temporary migration of our people. And yet, Deputy Morrissey, who, I gather, is concerned in Cork about pigs, will allow the children of our workers to die like flies rather than arm the Government with the public health powers that are necessary to ensure their survival.

In a White Paper issued some months ago the present position in regard to tuberculosis was discussed at length, together with the plans that have been adopted for dealing with the problem. It is not necessary for me to go over the same ground now. The downward trend from the high figure reached in 1942 in the mortality from tuberculosis, which continued in 1944, was maintained in 1945, when the number of deaths decreased by 149 as compared with the preceding year. The reorganisation of the tuberculosis dispensary service, with a view to improving the facilities for diagnosis, is in progress, and a mass miniature radiographic unit has been procured for Dublin City.

The Tuberculosis (Establishment of Sanatoria) Bill, 1945, became law on the 6th March, 1945. Since that date, under the zealous and energetic direction of the Parliamentary Secretary rapid progress has been made with the planning of the new regional sanatoria at Dublin, Cork and Galway, and sites have been acquired at Santry Court, County Dublin; Merlin Park, Galway, and Sarsfield's Court, Glanmire, County Cork. Work is proceeding on the clearing of the site at Santry Court. The contract for the site development works—the laying of roads, sewers and water-mains—has been let, and work will begin next week. It is hoped that actual building operations will commence early next year.

I may say that great care and thought have been devoted to selecting the most suitable sites for the sanatoria. It was considered essential that these should be situated near large cities so that the best medical talent would be available. The visiting of patients by their friends, and the recreation of the staff would also be facilitated by this contiguity. In planning these institutions it was decided that all forms of the disease should be accommodated, and that, in addition to pulmonary tuberculosis, which, of course, would comprise the majority of the cases, beds would also be provided for the treatment of nonpulmonary tuberculosis and for young adults with primary infections, whose health or whose circumstances might prevent them from resisting the disease in the normally successful manner. Perhaps I should stress the significance of the fact that I use the words "normally successful manner" to emphasise the prospects which those who might have incurred a primary infection have of making a complete recovery from the disease, because it is essential that the knowledge should be as widely spread as possible that this disease, if taken in its early stages, is eminently curable. A special section will be reserved to accommodate, in separate units, children with infective tuberculosis and those, as I have mentioned, with "primary" disease. In planning the sanatoria, arrangements have been made to ensure that children, while enjoying all the advantages to be gained from residence in such an institution, would be completely segregated from adults.

I should emphasise that intense study has been developed by the special committee concerned under the chairmanship of the Parliamentary Secretary to the planning of these institutions. They are designed to provide the comfort necessary to enable patients to remain for long periods and to give what might be described as "homely" surroundings. Further, beds will be so arranged that it will be possible to segregate patients in varying stages of the disease. The lay-out will also permit of the maximum amount of time being spent in the open air, since the buildings will provide loggias and other sheltered places.

An important feature in each institution will be that from 10 to 12 per cent. of all the beds will be of a hospital type. In fact, a hospital will be included as part of the sanatorium, so that, as distinct from sanatorium treatment, hospital treatment also will be provided for those who require it. There will also be facilities for minor chest surgery advanced radiography, physiotherapy, eye, ear, nose and throat, and other treatment. A special section will contain admission, observation and isolation units, so that before admission to the wards, a thorough investigation of each patient's case will be undertaken before treatment is commenced.

Partly to enable patients to enjoy their stay and to relieve the tedium of the long hours of convalescence and also to commence the rehabilitation work which will be continued after the patient leaves the sanatorium, extensive handicraft and other educational facilities will be provided. An institute for this purpose will be established in each sanatorium and facilities for instruction in gardening, fruit-growing, poultry-keeping, etc., will be available.

As regards medical research, opportunities will exist not only in the sanatorium proper but also in the fullyequipped laboratory. Training will be given to practitioners, students, and nurses, and a system of rotation arranged by which tuberculosis officers can, as temporary members of the staff, take part in the practice of the hospital and thus obtain experience in the latest methods of treatment.

The proposals which I have outlined for the new regional sanatoria have not been allowed to hold up the provision of local facilities for treatment. A new sanatorium of 92 beds was opened in County Monaghan during the year. In it 30 beds will be reserved for the treatment of County Louth patients. In Dublin two new ward blocks, containing 64 extra beds, are nearing completion at Rialto Hospital. At Crooksling Sanatorium 28 beds have been added, and work is in progress on a new nurses' home. In both these institutions the nursing staffs have been considerably increased. The provision of 50 additional beds at Peamount Sanatorium has been authorised, together with other structural improvements. The intention is to utilise Peamount as a regional sanatorium. Woodlands Sanatorium, Galway, has been enlarged by additional accommodation for 64 beds, and work is in progress on new kitchens, staff quarters and administrative block. It is proposed to re-open the county sanatorium at Keadue, County Cavan. This will provide 36 extra beds.

Several further hospital developments in relation to tuberculosis might be mentioned. St. Laurence's Hospital, popularly known as the Richmond Hospital, will shortly devote approximately 60 beds to tuberculosis cases, in a segregated block, where the distinguished physicians and surgeons of that hospital will add their efforts to the total war now being waged by the Department of Local Government and Public Health against the tuberculosis scourge.

The rehabilitation of a block of the Meath County Hospital, at Navan, has been arranged for and will provide a further 25 beds.

Arrangements have been made for chest surgery facilities in Peamount and, as I have already mentioned, considerable extensions in accommodation have been approved of for that sanatorium.

In many other areas activities in connection with the provision of further or improved bed accommodation for tuberculosis cases are in progress and are receiving constant attention.

Last year a Public Health Conference, which was attended by all the leading experts in the country, was convened by the Parliamentary Secretary (Dr. Ward) and amongst the important public health matters considered was the question of the establishment of a Scrum Institute, National Public Health Laboratory, National Blood Transfusion Service, Bureau of Standards and a National Types Laboratory. A tentative scheme of organisation was drawn up and negotiations are proceeding at present with academic bodies with a view to the establishment of these institutions either in relation to existing universities or medical schools, or as separate institutions. A further matter of great national importance which has been well advanced is the question of the protection of the people of this country from diseases which might be brought here by foreign travellers arriving by air. Since we are now within a few hours flying time of many of the world's great disease and plague centres, it can be appreciated how important and vital to the nation is an efficient health defence at our airports.

With regard to hospital construction, I am sorry to say that the very acute shortage of building materials which developed since 1939 and is still pronounced has rendered it difficult to deal with conditions of overcrowding that exists in several hospitals administered by public assistance authorities.

In Galway, where there is an acute need for more, hospital accommodation, some relief was obtained in the central hospital by transferring 40 patients to a new maternity hospital. Twentyeight additional beds were released by accommodating the hospital maids in the nurses' home. The planning of the regional hospital in Galway has reached the final stage.

The preparation of the plans of regional hospitals at Cork and Limerick is also proceeding, while the planning of new county and fever hospitals in eight counties, which was suspended when the emergency developed, has now been resumed.

Although no major hospital works of reconstruction were possible, a number of minor works are in progress. It is expected that tenders will be invited in the near future for the rehabilitation of Loughlinstown Hospital and the improvement of Croom County Hospital.

It may be well at this stage to stress that where new hospital works are dependent on grants from the Hospitals Trust Fund, the state of that fund at the time that local authorities look for authorisation to proceed is a factor which will naturally largely determine the decision.

The appointment of consultant surgeons to the staffs of several county hospitals was approved for a period of a year. The purpose of this arrangement is to reduce the number of patients sent to extern hospitals and to ensure so far as possible the most highly skilled treatment of patients locally.

The district mental hospitals have been maintained in good order and condition during the year. It is satisfactory to note that the decline in the number of patients in these institutions has continued. In March last, there were approximately 1,400 fewer patients under care than at the end of 1940. Admissions have decreased and discharges have increased. There was an increase in the death rate, due principally to the mortality amongst aged patients. These institutions are, we hope, at the beginning of a period of enhanced service to the community. The Mental Treatment Act, when it is brought fully into operation, will tend to break down the barriers which have separated the treatment of mental disorder from the treatment of other forms of disease, and, accordingly, will accentuate the value of the mental hospital as a curative hospital.

I have touched briefly on the more important matters arising on the Estimates, on those matters in which it seemed to me the Deputies would be interested and have, I hope, given an indication of the general trend of the activities of local authorities and a fair outline of the policy of the Department. Local bodies are emerging from a period in which many projects had to be laid aside until they could be realised in more propitious circumstances. Arrears of work have accumulated in housing, roads, hospitals and public health services generally.

These have now to be overtaken, with costs at higher levels and with materials and equipment still in short supply. We cannot afford to wait until everything is normal before addressing ourselves to the tasks ahead. Above everything else, we cannot afford to hearken to Deputy Hughes's cry: "Reverse engines."

Mr. Hughes

When did I say that?

Mr. MacEntee

On the Budget. At all costs we must get on the move and the sooner local authorities become active again the earlier they will get into their stride. In the Budget statement they have got an earnest of the Government's intention to help them in their difficulties. But from the local authorities themselves must come the initiative, enterprise and courage that will enable them to face their tasks with resolution. We have a local government machine which is gradually being altered so that it may work rapidly and efficiently and, I believe, notwithstanding much that has been said to the contrary, democratically. As the local authorities did not fail in the rôle assigned to them in the emergency, I am confident that, under the leadership of this Government, they will overcome the difficulties now confronting them and render to the community even much more valuable service than they have been able to render in the past.

Captain Giles

Has the Minister made any provision for lime in this Estimate? He must know very we that he will have a good deal of white washing to do in the coming year.

Mr. Hughes

One would expect Minister of State to show some concern about the tradition of this House but if we were looking for that concern from the present Minister we would be grievously disappointed. We were not expecting it, because the Minister has a record throughout the length and breadth of the country for his scurrility. Sometimes there might be an excuse for that sort of stuff at the crossroads, but it is contemptible for a Minister, supposed to be a responsible Minister, to indulge in scurrility, gross misrepresentation and perversion of truth in this House. I do not think it is going to be helpful for a useful and constructive discussion on this Estimate.

Mr. MacEntee

For Deputies to be reminded of what they said a few weeks ago?

Mr. Keating

Go back on what you said yourself now.

Mr. Hughes

One would have expected the Minister, anyway, to show a little discretion. The cloud over his Department at present is enough, without focusing attention on it.

Mr. MacEntee

Is this in order?

An Ceann Comhairle

I think it is a very unworthy remark.

Mr. Hughes

I withdraw the remark, but I think you will realise that it is the attitude of the Minister which provoked the remark. I know your concern for the dignity of the House and would expect a Minister, in the position the Minister holds, to show some concern and some responsibility, but he appears to have none. I say that the figures he quoted here and the attempt he made here to misrepresent grossly the Leader of this Party was a most discreditable performance and I do not think he impressed any individual in the House.

The Minister gave the impression that, in the last year in which Deputy Mulcahy was Minister for Local Government, he made a provision for housing of only £11,000. I went to some considerable trouble this morning to see what that position was and I found that that was absolutely incorrect. As a matter of fact, the number of houses built by the previous Administration was 24,566. Of those, 12,919 were built in urban areas and 11,647 in rural areas; local authorities built 8,580; public utility societies built 1,344 and private persons built 14,652. During that period, altogether £11,000,000 was spent on housing. On looking up the Estimates for 1929/30, I found the grants to local authorities under the Housing (Ireland) Act, 1919, were £1,655; grants to municipal authorities £5,000; and grants to persons and local authorities to build or reconstruct dwelling houses £235,000. So that, in all, in that particular year, over £242,000 was spent. A similar sum, about £245,000, appears in the Estimate for the year 1931/32, including Supplementary Estimates. In the particular year to which the Minister refers, 1932/33, a sum of £11,500 does appear, but there is an omission under the heading of Grants to Persons, Public Utility Societies and Local Authorities for the construction of dwelling houses. The provision the previous year there was £212,000. That particular Estimate was introduced by the Minister's colleague at that time, Mr. Seán T. O'Ceallaigh.

Mr. MacEntee

It was prepared by Deputy Mulcahy.

Mr. Hughes

It was prepared by the Department, under the previous Administration, I admit, but I want to make it clear to the House—and the Minister knows it very well—that that omission was made there because there was new housing legislation in course of preparation and the intention at that time was to pass that legislation and bring in a Supplementary Estimate. That is quite clear, because as a matter of fact his own Administration brought in a Supplementary Estimate that year for a sum of approximately £150,000. We must bear in mind that on a comparison at first flush it may appear small, but in that particular year the world generally was in the trough of the worst depression in its history.

Few countries were engaged to any great extent in house construction. We must remember the financial provisions that were made in those years, approximately £242,000, and compare them with the gross expenditure in this country. In that particular year, it was £21,000,000, according to the Estimates then, while to-day it is over £55,000,000. We must compare the purchasing power of the £ at that time with its purchasing power at present, and also remember the economic difficulties of the time. There were millions of people in the wealthiest country of the world walking the streets of New York and Chicago looking for work and unable to find it.

That is the sort of picture this Minister attempts to put across the House. Not only was he unfair in the comparison he made, but he actually suggested that only £11,000 was provided, when he knew that he was deliberately making use of a situation where the introduction of new legislation was pending. Deputy Mulcahy, who was then Minister, made that omission in order to bring in the other Estimate that the present Minister's colleague made provision for by Supplementary Estimate later on. Surely that is a discreditable and downright dishonest performance. One would expect the Minister to have more responsibility than to "jack-act" in that manner in this House. He forgot that he was in Parliament. He might try to put that across some ignorant people at crossroads in the country, but there is no use in telling us that that was the position, when the records of the House are at hand for anybody who is prepared to look them up. I was not a member of this Party at that time and, in the absence of the Leader of this Party, the man who has been so grossly misrepresented, I think it is only right that I should refer to it.

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy was only an unsuccessful candidate.

Mr. Hughes

The Deputy is here now and he will put the Minister in his place by exposing to the people outside the dishonest and dishonourable tactics of the Minister. If we are going to turn this institution into that sort of thing then it will be a bad day for the country. I am not reflecting on anyone. I do not intend to reflect on what has been done by the Government as far as the provision of housing is concerned. Their record is satisfactory. But I submit that if any other Administration was there during those years the same provision would have been made. It was inevitable that that provision would be made, as legislation later piloted through this House in 1932 was prepared by the then Minister for Local Government, the predecessor of Mr. Seán T. O'Kelly. It is uncalled for and a waste of time that we should have to argue over this issue. We should not be looking back, but looking forward at this juncture, to see what we can do in the way of construction and organisation.

The Minister boasts about what he has done, what he is going to do, and with his chest out one would imagine that we had such ideal conditions that they could not be improved upon. What is the Minister's policy? The Minister's policy is to depress wages and purchasing power to such an extent that we have to make provision by subsidies, food vouchers, fuel vouchers, as well as for shoes, boots and milk, so that the people will be so servile that they will eat out of the hands of Deputy Seán MacEntee, Minister for Local Government. The Minister believes in the dictum of Lenin, who said that those who commade the food vouchers of the people command their votes. That is what the Minister for Local Government believes in. He does not believe in the people having decent incomes. He believes in depressing their incomes, and in having them so servile that they have to depend on State subsidies, State assistance, free milk, free fuel and free boots.

The people are no longer free agents, because they are the servants of Deputy Seán MacEntee, Minister for Local Government, who, sitting as dictator in the Custom House, can direct the affairs of public authorities. They can only be directed according to his commands. That is the ambition of the present Minister. The Minister has reached the height of his ambition when he has these unfortunate people feeding out of his hands. On the other hand, power and authority that rightly belong to the people and to their representatives are vested in the Minister. He has warned public authorities that if they do not make adequate provision by way of rates he is going to use the steam roller on them. As a result of the power he got a few weeks ago in the Local Government Bill he can compel them by writ of mandamus to do his will, and their judgment shall not operate. The people were quite competent to elect the Fianna Fáil Government, and were very able and very intelligent people then, but when it comes to administering local affairs they are utterly incompetent and unable to direct their affairs. The dictator in the Custom House is going to do that.

That is the progress that has been made. That is what the present Minister feels proud of. He has even gone further. A circular letter has been issued to local officials informing them that, no matter what grievance they have, they should not approach Deputies; that it would be unwise for them to do so, as they would run the risk of losing their positions. Have we or have we not local administration? The officials connected with local administration are absolutely controlled from the Custom House. They are appointed through the county managers, who are the creatures of the Minister. The officials of local authorities have become civil servants and local administration has gone.

It is only there in name. That is what we were told is the ideal position to which the Minister referred when winding up his statement. He stated that he has changed the machinery of local government. Of course he has. The only local government machinery now is the dictator in the Custom House. That is what the Minister wants. I do not know whether the people of this country have learned anything from the history of what happened in Germany and Italy or the terrible desolation and disasters that have resulted from the ambition of men in these countries.

Mr. MacEntee

All men in coloured shirts—blue shirts.

Mr. Hughes

What coloured shirt is the Minister wearing? I think the Minister wants to put the people of this country into a straight shirt. The sooner the country puts him into a straight shirt the better. Imagine telling local officials that as individuals they have no rights, and that if they have grievances they must not use public representatives to have them adjusted. They were told that they have no right to approach members of this House to put before them any grievances or any unfair treatment for which the Minister may be responsible. We are told that is democracy. These officials are denied their lawful rights under the Constitution. The Minister sends down a circular and puts the fear of God into them. They are trembling, and are afraid to open their mouths to any Deputy about any of their problems or their grievances.

Let us take the Appointments Commission. We have an Appointments Commission operated in the Klu Klux Klan style.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister has nothing to do with it.

Mr. Hughes

I do not know whether he has or not.

An Ceann Comhairle

He has not.

Mr. Killilea

The Ceann Comhairle is getting "the works" now.

Mr. Hughes

It is a very funny thing if he has not. The housing problem is an urgent problem, and any help or assistance the Minister wants in that regard will be forthcoming from any side of the House, but there is one thing about which the Minister in his grand plans and promises in regard to the transitional development fund had not pleased me. I think he will hear it from other Deputies as well. It is time for him to face up to the fact that he has to determine for the country and for the local authorities what the contribution is to be. There is no use sidestepping that aspect by saying that he will be very generous in making allocations from that fund. If we are to face this huge problem of housing, we want to know what the plans are and there is no use in postponing it in the hope that it will be side-stepped. I agree that an economic rent must be fixed in relation to the income of the community. That income is very low and the paper on National Income and Expenditure, published recently by the Minister for Industry and Commerce——

Mr. MacEntee

By the Minister for Finance.

Mr. Hughes

——shows that only 190,000 in this country have incomes over £3 per week. The vast majority of the people have incomes of £3 and under, so that, bearing that in mind, we can appreciate the necessity for fixing low economic rents. The Minister must make up his mind that the State subsidy has to be increased, if local authorities are to be encouraged to face up to this problem and to plan in a big way for the provision of houses. The housing survey to which the Minister referred indicates that.

I welcome what has been done in relation to the cost of money. Deputy McGilligan's work, advice and pressure in this House have borne fruit at last. He has been a long time at it, but he has succeeded in convincing the Government and the Minister for Finance that it is possible to provide money at 2½ per cent. We are beginning to learn something. We are beginning to realise that there are new financial ideas in the world, but it is only within the last few months that the Government have wakened up to the need for getting away from the conservative outlook which they have held in recent years. A good deal of preliminary work in the preparation of sites has been done, but very much more could be done, and if the carrying out of all preliminary work in the country is encouraged now, the problem of houses eventually, when materials come on the market again, will be expedited.

I am wondering how much of this money will be spent in this particular year. Will the materials be available in this coming year? Is the Minister satisfied that sufficient material will be available to exhaust the sum provided? I am very doubtful, in view of the information given by the Minister for Industry and Commerce who said he hoped to import 15,000 standards of timber as against 37,000 standards. I understand that some investigations have been proceeding with regard to substitute materials. If we are to provide houses for our people in a reasonable time, a considerable amount of substitution will have to take place, because, with the huge demand for timber all over the world, it is very doubtful if we will be able to secure our peak requirements. I urge again the necessity for research in that regard. It should be possible to substitute to a fairly considerable extent. It is amazing what can be done with concrete at present and I should like to hear something from the Minister on the matter.

I should like to hear if the committee set up to deal with this matter of finding substitutes has succeeded in producing any reasonable type of house. When I speak of a reasonable type, I mean a house of decent standard and I hope the Minister will insist on a decent standard. There is on use in having jerry-built houses— it would be a very short-sighted policy.

In the provision of houses, I suggest that some allocation ought to be made for newly-married couples. As the regulations stand, newly - married couples are in a hopeless position. It is very unfair and very bad policy that that should be so, and I suggest that the matter be examined and some provision made for people who intend to get married. Further, I hope we will depart from the policy operated before the war of building one type of house all over the country. Let us have a little variety in design. Let us show that we have imagination and engineers capable of giving us variety. Let us not have a position in which the visitor going for a run in a car through the country will see the one type of house everywhere. One would think we had no imagination and no engineers capable of giving us some variety of design. It will make the country much more attractive and picturesque if there is variation.

A big problem arises all over the country, and particularly in rural towns, with regard to facilities for people to keep pigs and poultry. We send engineers down to examine and inspect layouts and, as a matter of fact, I think local engineers are encouraged to develop sites which are not suited to the type of people who are to be put on these sites. Quite a number of poor people in local towns have supplemented their incomes by keeping a pig and a few poultry, and I think it is a very good indication of thrift and industry which ought to be encouraged. It gives them an opportunity of getting a few pounds together to enable them to purchase clothes for their family, and it is a very great hardship to overcrowd the site to such an extent that people have no facilities in this respect in their yards or in the patch of ground provided with the house.

It is a completely wrong outlook. We are not so short of land that we must tighten our people up to that extent. Before houses are built, a very careful survey should be made of the type of applicants to be put into them and of their anxiety to have facilities of that kind. If they are anxious to have facilities for the keeping of pigs and poultry, these facilities should be provided. I know from personal experience a few cases of great hardship in which people have been transferred from slum districts into nice houses. They do not appreciate the change at all, and they are grousing and grumbling because they are prevented by the medical officer from pursuing activities in that direction which they have been used to pursuing all their lives. Instead of being discouraged, they ought to be encouraged, and I hope the Minister will look into the point.

I want now to direct the Minister's attention to the regulations governing the selection of tenants for houses in agricultural districts. The Minister cannot afford to overlook the requirements of the primary industry. Tenants are selected on the ground of the conditions in their old houses—bad conditions, overcrowding, the presence of tuberculosis cases, and so on. I agree that we cannot ignore that aspect, but, if we are to have a prosperous and efficient agriculture, the workers must be properly housed. I cannot understand a Minister who is prepared to make regulations and who knows the requirements so far as man-power is concerned in the primary industry of the country making regulations which adversely affect the housing of that man-power. Does it not appear to be an extraordinary situation where a cottage may be situated on a farm and where the owner of that cottage and that farm urgently requires a good worker that he is not free to select a tenant himself? If there are half a dozen applicants for that particular house, three or four of whom are excellent farm workers, the tenant is selected purely on health grounds and overcrowding and so on. Is it not rather an extraordinary situation that the economic aspect of that problem should be completely ignored?

Surely the Minister must appreciate that if we are going to have the social services of which he himself appears to be so proud these social services have to be paid for out of our capacity to produce out of the national income and surely we must appreciate that agriculture makes a very big and a very important contribution to that national income. I think the time has come when we should concern ourselves more forcefully with the man-power requirements of our primary industry.

The Minister gave us some information about the grants for road construction. A very substantial sum is provided by way of grant in the present financial year in an attempt to overtake the deterioration that has occurred in recent years. I think myself that is a very wise provision, but, at the same time, I would impress upon the Minister that the present system of allocating road grants is completely obsolete. The allocation is carried out under an old Act. That Act was all right in its own time, but it is now completely outmoded because of road development. I think that grants should be made available for roads other than trunk roads and main roads. The people who subscribe to the Road Fund by means of road tax live all over the country—on link roads and on by-roads. I know some counties which had to scarify the road services, which were in reasonably good condition, in order to qualify for a road grant. I submit that the road grant out of the Road Fund should be spent at the discretion of the local authority working in conjunction with the local engineer and in collaboration with the inspector of the Minister's Department, and it should not be tied up to a particular type of road. The policy should be to spend it to the best advantage in every county.

In the Volume of Estimates, there is a contribution of £230,000 by way of a supplementary allowance for old-age pensions, representing 75 per cent. of the total cost. I think it is a disgrace that we should tolerate a policy in this country whereby when there is some other income coming into a household the old-age pensioner is debarred from the full benefit. The purchasing power of 10/- is very, very low at the present moment and the difference of 2/6 which is provided under this particular sub-head is not nearly sufficient to bridge the increase in the cost of living. Surely, this is an invidious discrimination as between one old-age pensioner and another merely because in one case there happens to be perhaps a married son living with his mother or his father; probably the married son may find it very very difficult to make ends meet on his own wages and in so far as his own family is concerned. In cases like that I think it is a grave hardship that the old-age pensioner should have that cut of 2/6 and be debarred from benefiting under this scheme. I trust the Minister will look into that and that that little benefit will be extended to all old-age pensioners.

I do not think the Minister made any reference at all to the voluntary hospital deficits or to what the position is in that respect. He said, on the one hand, that he had great prospects in regard to housing for the coming year and, on the other hand, that he was rather pessimistic about the provision of hospitals because of the limited amount of material available. I would like to know what the policy is so far as hospital deficits are concerned and met out of Hospitals Trust Fund. A substantial sum is required for that purpose and there has been a progressive increase from year to year. I think this House would be very anxious to find out whether the Minister is now going to capitalise that very substantial margin or when this increase is going to be stopped.

The Minister must understand that every county is most anxious to make hospital provision and most anxious to see this problem determined because it has an important bearing on the Hospitals Trust Fund and on the moneys that are likely to be made available for hospital construction throughout the country. All the benefit cannot go to Dublin alone. I do not wish to reflect in any way on the Dublin hospitals because they are doing wonderful work and they have provided services for the local authorities at very reasonable rates. At the same time the problem is one that must be faced up to by the Minister and he must either capitalise the deficits that are there or at least let us know what he proposes to do in regard to them.

The Minister boasted of the fact that there was a considerable increase in the number of officials in his Department. To use his own phrase he is now running his Department "on an empire scale". I want to say something about the officials in order to draw the Minister's attention to a particular problem in regard to the transfer of officials. I do not blame the officials themselves for applying for better positions when and as they arise; but it is hardly fair to local bodies in the country that they should be used merely as a training ground for young ambitious officials. I know that in Carlow in a particular accountancy period we had four or five different accountants. That makes the position very difficult for the county council secretary. Before the auditor comes along he has suffered four changes of accountant in a particular accountancy period.

There should be substantial increments for efficient service, so as to induce an official to remain with the local authority that he is serving. This thing of young fellows, ambitious to get to the top early, going from one local authority to another, may be all right for the officials concerned, but is certainly not doing justice to the local authority that is paying them. While some of the young fellows who have been appointed as secretaries to county councils may be brilliant and may have done exceptionally well at an examination, such positions require a good deal of experience and a very important qualification, in my opinion, is the amount of experience. An older man, say, of 50 years of age, as a result of his experience of the work, will certainly beat the young fellow every time. I merely bring to the Minister's attention the local authority's point of view and the fact that they are being used by ambitious young men for the purpose of training for the best offices in the country under the local government service. The terms of appointment and conditions of service should be arranged in such a way that an individual official would pause before he would leave that service to go somewhere else merely because a better job was on offer. The way out is to scale up emoluments for long and efficient service, which will encourage officials to remain in a constant position over a long period.

The Minister gave us some information about sewerage and water schemes. He stressed the importance of providing water at sufficient pressure for fire-fighting. Would the Minister tell us, in replying, how local authorities generally are provided in the matter of fire-fighting equipment? Is he satisfied that local authorities all over the country have modern equipment of the right type capable of dealing with a fire in any part of their administrative district?

The Minister gave the House rather interesting and encouraging figures in connection with births, marriages and deaths. He talked about national vitality and the revival of national vitality under his administration. I do not think the Minister has read the very interesting publication on National Income and Expenditure, 1938 to 1944. This publication is so very interesting that I cannot help reading it when I get an opportunity. If the Minister turns to page 52 he will find that the statisticians point out:—

"The marriage rate is known to be influenced by prevailing economic conditions. The depression in the early thirties coincided with a period of relatively few marriages."

The Minister has very nicely overlooked that early period of his administration.

"From then on the rate showed a tendency to rise with the general rise in incomes: during this period the rapidly increasing urbanisation was another factor favouring the marriage rate."

Whether the Minister approved of the rapid increase in urbanisation, or not, I do not know, but he can scarcely approve of the top-heavy City of Dublin.

"It will be seen that the war did not affect the marriage rate to any extent until 1942, the year in which it may be observed the effects of the war on national income became definitely marked in this country. Marriages in 1942 and 1943 were far above those in previous years while a certain falling-off is apparent in 1944.

War usually occasions an immediate rise in the marriage rate in belligerent countries as in the case of England and Wales in the present war where exceedingly high rates are recorded for 1939 and 1940 since when there has been a very severe decline.

In neutral countries it would appear that the rise in marriages does not occur for some time after the outbreak of war. The experience of this country in the recent conflict might be paralleled with that of most neutral countries such as Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland, etc., in the last war. A war-time rise in marriages is a temporary phenomenon and the future trend in the marriage rate will largely depend upon post-war economic conditions."

The experts attribute that rise to war conditions but, of course, the Minister for Local Government says it is the Fianna Fáil policy.

Mr. MacEntee

Of course it is— nothing else. The Deputy even had to admit that himself in the earlier part of that quotation.

Mr. Hughes

There is another little quotation from this very nice publication. It is on page 46:—

"Principally on account of the safety valve of emigration this country has had a relatively favourable unemployment experience during the emergency though, in fact, this favourable position did not approach that in belligerent countries where unemployment practically vanished. The situation has been mitigated also by recruiting in the Defence Forces."

I suggest to the Minister that he should study that publication and that if he did study it in detail he might not be inclined to throw out his chest to the same extent and tell of the magnificent things he has achieved under his policy of doles and subsidies, free milk and free boots.

The Minister showed us that we have a very big problem so far as infantile mortality is concerned. It does seem extraordinary that mortality is so much greater in Dublin than in the western districts. The Minister made no attempt to explain why that is so. He has set up some committees to examine the problem. What is the cause of the problem? Is it the shocking conditions in the slum districts of the city, or what is it?

The Minister chid Deputy Morrissey about his opposition to the Public Health Bill. It is a pity the Minister did not sit in while that Bill was under discussion. He might have learned a good deal if he had sat in the House during the discussion of that particular measure. There was no opposition from any part of this House so far as the maternity and child welfare scheme is concerned but, so far as infringing and invading in any way the freedom and liberty of the individual is concerned, we defended the right of the individual and were not going to allow the State to dragoon and regiment the people. I am glad to see that the provisions are substantially and drastically changed on Report. I think we can take some credit for that.

We are very pleased to hear that the sites for tuberculosis sanatoria have been selected, that site development work is taking place and that we are now nearing the stage when foundations will be laid. That is urgently necessary in view of the high incidence of tuberculosis.

In connection with the commission that was set up to examine into the milk supply for the City of Dublin, would the Minister say what stage has been reached and when we may expect a report?

In regard to sub-head H (4)—Expenses in connection with the survey of human nutrition—in connection with which a certain sum of money was provided for the purpose of training a number of students for this particular work, we would like to know what progress has been made, and what particular aspect of this problem is now being investigated. I think it is a very important and very essential work. We will find, I believe, especially among the poorer classes, where you have the lower incomes, that the diet is definitely unbalanced. Probably there are not enough vitamins or proteins, not sufficient of the protective food that we have heard so much about at big international conferences within the past two or three years, notably the Food and Agricultural Organisation. I believe our problem is similar to the problems that have been described at these conferences. We are told that the world before the war had possibly sufficient calories, but not merely enough of the protective foods that are so essential to health, vigour and good physique.

I welcome the step the Minister is taking with reference to a proper survey of our diet and the type of food our people are consuming. We hear talk about various disease problems. We have a tuberculosis problem and a high incidence of other diseases. While we must deal with the incidence of disease and provide institutions for treatment, the real solution is the one I referred to when I was speaking in a critical way about the Minister's policy. We should aim at higher incomes for our people, putting them in a position to purchase an adequate amount of protective food to ensure the maintenance of good health. That is one solution and proper housing is the other. The Minister indicated the plans he has in mind with reference to housing. I do not think anyone can criticise those provisions, but State subsidies, State schemes, charitable schemes, are not a solution so far as the provision of ample food for our people is concerned. The Government should arrange our economy in such a way that our workers will get an opportunity of earning sufficient to maintain themselves and their families in a reasonable way. I move, on behalf of Deputy Coogan:—

That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration.

Mr. Blowick

There are some very important items that stand out in reference to the administration of this Department. We have such things as housing, public health and roads. In the matter of public health, tuberculosis is in the forefront. The Minister has promised us a big housing programme. Every Deputy will agree that that is absolutely necessary. He mentioned some cities but he did not tell us what plans have been made to provide houses in rural towns. Will the housing programme be devoted solely to the few cities the Minister named, or will it be spread over our rural towns and villages? I speak with an intimate knowledge of certain towns in County Mayo, where the housing conditions are pretty serious. There are many families being huddled together in veritable rabbit warrens. I have in mind such towns as Castlebar and Westport. Something will have to be done in the matter of housing in these towns in the very near future in order to relieve the pressure there.

There was an attempt made some years ago to provide houses in Castlebar. I hope that certain things that happened there will not deter the Minister from building in that town again. A number of new houses were built on a certain type of site and some difficulties arose. I hope the Minister will see that the Department will interest itself in further house building there. It is a fact that five or six separate blocks of houses heeled over and had to be demolished, but I would not take that too seriously and I hope that will not stop the Minister from tackling the housing problem in that town. The remainder of the houses in that particular building scheme are still standing and I am told on good authority that there is a chance that the houses will last at least for another half score of years. The houses that were built tipped over because of faulty foundations, but it appears that when new houses were erected on the same sites the foundations were made perfectly sound and the houses do not show any signs of leaning over or nodding to each other since. I am told they are perfectly sound now. At any rate, the people living in them are satisfied; they are not scared and they have not run away.

The road question embraces quite a number of problems. We all know the main roads deteriorated very seriously during the emergency period. The county engineers are doing their best to overtake the deterioration and there are good prospects now of materials such as bitumen coming back. There was a lot of road widening done during the emergency, and a lot of money was spent cutting corners. These works have been left in an unfinished state and they are a positive danger. Some roads were widened and the bridges which were just the width of the old roads are still there, constituting a bottle-neck, very often at the bottom of a hill. When the widening was done the bridges should have been widened also and so avoid the bottle-necks that now occur at dangerous spots. There is considerable danger for motorists who may not be familiar with the roads.

A certain sum is collected annually from owners of motor vehicles. It runs to £2,250,000. We find that about £1,000,000 is returned for road construction and maintenance. The £2,250,000 is collected in road taxes, drivers' licences and the tax on petrol and oil. Obviously it is levied on the motor-owning public because of damage or alleged damage done to the roads, yet not all of the money is returned for the purpose for which it has been levied and collected. I submit the full amount should be returned for road construction and maintenance. The roads must be maintained. Motor owners, whether they have buses, lorries, cars or motor bicycles, are being taxed because of the damage their vehicles do to the roads. All that money is not devoted to the purpose for which it is collected and we find that the farmers and the ratepayers of the country generally are being taxed to make up the difference between the amount contributed from central funds and the amount which is necessary to expend to maintain these roads in a proper condition. The money is levied on the owners of motor vehicles, and by virtue of the fact that it is not all returned to local funds, the farmers and ratepayers are compelled to make up the difference. That means that two sets of people are being taxed to maintain the roads. I say that money collected from users of motor vehicles because of the wear and tear occasioned to the roads by these vehicles, should be returned to local funds to be expended for the purpose for which it is collected. A tax is being indirectly imposed on the ratepayers of the country because it is obvious that when any sum out of the Road Fund is diverted into central funds, the ratepayers generally will have to make good the deficiency.

As regards by-roads, I would say that the question of the future maintenance of these roads must be considered by the Government and by the Local Government Department at once. It has become a burning question in every area. I admit that it is a fairly big question to tackle, but it must be faced. I suggest that those who should have first claim on the ratepayers are the people living along by-roads. They are paying rates in the same way as other ratepayers, but there is a definite discrimination shown in the treatment of people living along by-roads as against those who are fortunate enough to live along main roads or contract roads. An attempt was made to deal with this situation in my county by levying a rate of 4d. in the £ on all ratepayers, the proceeds of the rate to be devoted to paying the 25 per cent. contribution necessary for works carried out under rural improvement schemes. A deputation of representatives from Mayo County Council waited on the Minister a month or six weeks ago to ascertain his views in regard to this suggestion and he said that it would be illegal to use the rates for this purpose. I do not see what is wrong in legalising that proposal. The people who would benefit by these rural improvement schemes are not always able to make the necessary 25 per cent. contribution. Many of them are small farmers living on wretchedly small holdings of land.

Mr. MacEntee

I do not wish to interrupt the Deputy, but that Vote is not under the control of my Department. We do not administer the Vote for rural improvement schemes.

Mr. Blowick

I am perfectly aware that the Vote for rural improvement schemes does not come under the Minister's Department. What I am asking the Minister is to take over the by-roads and the administration of the rural improvement schemes. He is trying to evade his responsibility in the matter by suggesting that I am out of order in raising the question. I know quite well what I am talking about. I am asking him to take over the administration of the by-roads. His Department will have to take them over.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy can ask him to take them over, but they are not his responsibility at the moment. They come under the Vote for rural improvement schemes, which is administered by another Department.

Mr. Blowick

I cannot see that I am out of order in saying that the Department of Finance have failed in their duties in this respect and I want the Department of Local Government, whose engineers actually administer these schemes, to become responsible for these by-roads. The Department must take them over sooner or later, and the sooner the better. In many cases the condition of by-roads has deteriorated to such an extent that it is not safe for human beings or even animals to travel over them. For all practical purposes vehicular traffic has ceased on many of these roads for years. Yet when an attempt is made by the Mayo County Council to tackle this problem, we are told by the Mini-bar ster that the scheme which they but forward is not legal. I gather from him it would be a mountainous proceeding to operate such a scheme. Surely when the Government have dealt with so many big problems by virtue of Emergency Powers Orders they should not strain at swallowing this gnat? It is a very serious problem and a large section of the rural community are being victimised under the present system. As I have said, those who are fortunate enough to live along main roads or contract roads are very lucky but a huge number of farmers in my county are not so lucky. When sickness visits the homes of people living in these backward areas, a doctor or a priest cannot bring a motor car within any reasonable distance of their houses. Yet they have to pay rates and maintain the main roads of the county in the same way as their more fortunate neighbours.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is it not within the competence of the local authority to take over these by-roads once they are repaired?

Mr. Blowick

Of course it is and it shows a great disregard for a certain section of the people that they have not being taken over and dealt with a long time ago.

Mr. Allen

Why does the Mayo County Council not take them over?

Mr. Blowick

The Deputy will get his chance of speaking later and I am sure the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will give him an opportunity of saying anything he wants to say about the Mayo County Council.

Mr. Allen

I am asking why the Mayo County Council did not take over these roads.

Mr. Blowick

We know quite well why they did not take them over.

Mr. Allen

Why?

Mr. Blowick

Another matter to which I want to bring the notice of the Minister is the hopeless condition of the water supply in the town of Castlebar. For two years I have been receiving constant complaints in regard to this matter. I do not know exactly where the fault lies but the fact remains that people living in certain parts of the town on fairly high ground have to wait up at night until 1 o'clock to let the water trickle from the taps into tubs to provide a supply for the next day.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is there not a local authority in Castlebar?

Mr. Blowick

Is the Minister not responsible for all local authorities? There is a local authority in Castlebar. If the Minister would point out how I am out of order or how this matter is outside the scope of the debate I shall gladly give way to him.

Mr. MacEntee

These representations should come from the local authority, not from the Minister.

Mr. Blowick

When the local authority falls down on its job, then the Minister is directly responsible.

Mr. MacEntee

Does the Deputy want me to abolish them?

Mr. Blowick

The Minister is a good hand at abolishing. In this case I do not want him to abolish the local authority but I want him to see that if a fire breaks out in the town of Castlebar, the residents of that town will not be left in danger of their lives owing to lack of a proper water supply. There was a fire in a goods store in that town recently. I understand that there was a very insufficient supply of water with the result, that the whole goods store was burned down. If the Minister were living in Castlebar, and if some members of his household had to wait up until 1 o'clock at night in order to get a supply of water for the next day, he would not be so flippant on this subject. I think old age pensions are administered by the Minister's Department.

Mr. MacEntee

No they are not— only appeals.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Appeals from decisions of the local sub-committees.

Mr. Blowick

Well, the administration of the supplementary allowance of 2/6 comes under his Department.

Mr. MacEntee

It does.

Mr. Blowick

I should like to get figures for each county showing how many people have taken advantage of this supplementary allowance of 2/6. In most cases I have heard the scheme decried on the ground that in order to qualify for this allowance a person has to prove that he is almost a complete pauper. He must be practically destitute before he gets the additional 2/6. Again may I point out that the officials who administer the scheme do not seem to know exactly in what cases they are supposed to grant this allowance? I remember that on one occasion an official in my county gave two absolutely conflicting opinions on that matter and the county council did not seem to know where it stood. From the first answer it would appear that the applicant has to go to the local home assistance officer and prove that he is absolutely destitute and has no other means but the 10/- Later on, he contradicted that statement. I should like the Minister to make the position quite clear once and for all.

The last speaker mentioned the matter of promotion in county council staffs. I think it is a very bad practice that officials who have given life long service to a county council should be passed over, overridden so to speak, and that a young man, perhaps with very excellent educational qualifications, should be appointed to the position of county manager or county secretary through the Local Appointments Commission. I think it is a very bad practice.

I think that, in the case of a local official who has given ten, 20 or 30 years' service in a county, and who is familiar with every aspect of the work there, a much greater measure of efficiency would be maintained in the county if the ordinary system of promotion were in operation. Surely, it should be possible for the Minister to find amongst local officials men who are well qualified to fill any vacancy that may arise within the county. There is not much incentive for local officials if, after working themselves up, so to speak, from the bottom of the ladder, they find that, no matter how efficient they may be, they are not going to get a job when it becomes vacant.

There is a good deal of criticism, and justifiable criticism I think, as regards the appointment of dispensary doctors in many areas. These appointments are made by the Local Appointments Commission, but the dispensary doctors are under the control of the Minister.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Not the appointments.

Mr. Blowick

Not the appointments, but dispensary doctors are, as I say, under the control of the Minister. It is a very strange thing that a young unqualified man was able to acquaint some of his friends six months in advance of the vacancy occurring that——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister has nothing to do with these appointments, and the Deputy cannot indict him in regard to them.

Mr. Blowick

I would like to bring the matter to the Minister's notice so that he would direct the attention of the Minister concerned to it.

Mr. MacEntee

There is a separate Vote for the Local Appointments Commission.

Mr. Blowick

Very good. We will thrash this matter out when that Vote comes on. With regard to the housing grants, I hope that, so far as the rural areas are concerned, something will be done whereby grants and loans may be made available for the erection of out-offices. I had high hopes that the farm improvements scheme, which is administered by the Department of Agriculture, would be widened in its scope so that grants and loans would be made available for the erection of out-offices and granaries. That, however, was not done. I think that a scheme, such as I have in mind, could be more easily administered through the Department of Local Government and Public Health in conjunction with the scheme for housing loans and grants. Huge sums of money are lost each year by farmers due to the fact that they have not sufficient out-office buildings for the storing of grain, machinery, etc.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The housing grants administered by the Minister for Local Government refer to the housing of persons only.

Mr. Blowick

I am suggesting to the Minister that he should increase the housing grants so that provision might be made for loans and grants for the erection of out-offices on farmsteads. I want to assure him that if he were to introduce a Supplementary Estimate to enable him to do that, his scheme would meet with general approval in the House.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That would involve new legislation, and the Deputy may not advocate that on an Estimate. The question the Deputy is raising is altogether outside the scope of the Minister's administration. Only administration during the present year may be discussed on an Estimate.

Mr. Blowick

I do not think that what I am advocating would call for new legislation.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It would. In any case, that matter was discussed at some length on the Vote for the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. Blowick

And the Minister for Agriculture then disclaimed all responsibility in the matter. I hope the Minister will bear in mind the points I have put before him. The question with regard to by-roads must definitely be undertaken in the near future. In connection with the fairly large sum which the Minister is asking for housing, I hope that materials will be available and that schemes for housing will not go the way that the Arterial Drainage Act has gone. His colleague the Minister for Finance got an adequate sum of money to spend on drainage, but now we find that the Drainage Act is pigeonholed. Every time we refer to it and ask why it is not being operated we are given poor excuses.

Mr. M. O'Sullivan

A short time ago, in reply to a question on housing subsidies in so far as they affect local authorities, the Minister indicated that a statement would be made on that subject on the introduction of the Budget by the Minister for Finance as well as on the question of the facilities to be afforded for obtaining loans at 2½ per cent. in the future. A statement was also to be made on the transitional fund, as to how it was to be applied in certain circumstances.

On the 5th of the present month the Minister for Finance returned to that particular subject and said that where local authorities had a housing project on hands they would get the usual subsidy plus a loan from the Local Loans Fund at 2½ per cent., and over and above that, that they would get out of the transition fund, where necessary, a grant to bring the rent down to a reasonable figure in relation to the present wage income. The money advanced thus would be by outright grant and not by way of loan." The Minister for Finance referred to the subject again at much greater length in his speech in Cork a few nights ago. The Minister for Local Government has also referred to it on the introduction of this Vote. It is very hard for anyone interested in this question to get out of these statements a correct picture as to what definite arrangements will be made under the scheme outlined by both Ministers.

The Minister for Finance says "where necessary". Now, what are the conditions which would make it necessary? I presume, although I may not be altogether right in this, that the reason why both Ministers are withholding a statement so far as the subsidy is concerned is probably due to the same cause which operates in England. There, the Minister for Health decided that he would not disclose what subsidy arrangement would be made so that he might assure himself that building costs would subside to a reasonable figure within a reasonable time.

If that be the reason why the Minister here is withholding details of the subsidy, I would suggest to him that the position here is not quite on a parallel with that which obtains on the other side. There, it is quite possible that you may have a very large number of contractors tendering for a particular scheme under a local authority. The local authority may feel that, by accepting the tender at a given price, they would be imposing an undue burden on themselves. For that reason the local authority might play with the idea of a postponement, so that the hopes of their Minister for Health might be realised, and that contractors would have, eventually, to force down their costs.

Let us suppose that that is the position on the other side. I suggest that the position here is quite different because we have relatively fewer contractors. That applies particularly in the case of the City of Dublin. Most of the building that has taken place during the last six years under the Minister's sanction has been confined to the municipality of Dublin. Our experience has been that certainly not more than half a dozen contractors are usually concerned in contracts all the time. If my presumption is correct, the Minister is anxious to withhold details of the subsidy with a view to assuring himself of a stable position regarding costs in the future. I suggest to him that that aim of his may be reached by either of two methods or by both. The first would be the introduction of direct labour so far as the local authority is concerned, and secondly, the fixation of a standard rate of profit so far as the contractors are concerned.

As regards direct labour, Dublin Corporation, reviewing their housing position only last night, decided unanimously that they should take that step for a reason in addition to that which I have given. The corporation feel that they should be personally associated with the housing drive and that, as a result of operating a scheme of that character by direct labour, they should have the details for which they now have to rely on contractors. I understand that that proposal is being submitted to the Minister, and I trust, because of the advantages we feel that scheme will give to Dublin Corporation, the Minister will not delay his decision and that it will be favourable. The Minister might reply on the question of the fixing of the rate of profits by saying that that would be a certain disability inasmuch as the contractors would divert their activities to private building. I suggest that he can control any development, in that way by rigid adherence to a system of priorities.

We are particularly interested in Dublin Corporation in the question of subsidy. I have drawn attention to it on various occasions here by way of Parliamentary question and in debate. The same thing applies to every local authority, in greater or lesser degree, throughout the country. Housing subsidies were fixed under the Act of 1932 with a ceiling figure of £500 in respect of one set of buildings and £450 in respect of another set. In the intervening period—particularly in the later stages when costs commenced to rise—it was obvious that the local authority, in our case Dublin Corporation, had to bear an undue share of the building costs inasmuch as they had to bridge the difference between the ceiling figure and the actual cost. This question is of particular moment to us in Dublin because we have fixed—arbitrarily or otherwise—the rents of our houses at, roughly, 2/6 per room. That standard has obtained for a number of years notwithstanding that building costs have soared during the past four years. It is evident from that that the ratepayers in the city are bearing a very large proportion of the housing costs. It would appear from the statement of the Minister for Finance that we are to get a grant—a forthright grant, not a loan—out of the transitional fund.

He is to make that grant retrospective from 1st April, 1945. I ask the Minister, if not in reply to this debate, then at the earliest opportunity by means of circular to the local authorities, to indicate on what basis that grant will be paid and to what extent it will affect houses which we have built as from 1945 to date. We want to fix our rents. The Minister, in his statement regarding the grant, said that there must be a relation with present wage income. I think that that is an excellent pronouncement. But what is the relationship to be? It was felt to be equitable formerly that rents should range around 12½ per cent, or one-eighth of the individual's income. Neither Minister has determined what the rate in this case is to be. I want to know on what basis we are to receive our grants and, further, the extent to which the subsidy will be offered, because the subsidy has a more or less permanent character. The Minister for Finance is to introduce an Estimate in this connection and, when he does so, we may have an opportunity of discussing the subject. Building during the next five or ten years will be largely based on the form of subsidy in operation since 1932. It is unnecessary for me to say that that subsidy is grossly inadequate, having regard to present housing costs.

So far as we can see, Dublin Corporation will not be able to touch any aspect of housing, other than slum clearance, for the next five years. We have reached the crisis-stage so far as other sections of the community are concerned. The position of newly-married couples has already been referred to in the debate. They cannot secure a room, furnished or unfurnished, in the city except at a prohibitive rent. Another section which cannot be dealt with, apparently, by the municipality is that which formerly benefited under the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Act. Over 5,000 persons in the city secured their own homes by means of advances by Dublin Corporation under that Act. The terms were somewhat onerous because of the rate of interest at which the money had to be borrowed.

Other sections of the people will also be outside the purview of the corporation. In that regard, may I suggest, in the light of my own experience, that inasmuch as local authorities will, probably, have to concentrate on slum clearance, because of the question of materials and the question of labour, the Minister should consider, as a matter of grave urgency, the convening under his own chairmanship of a conference representative of local authorities to discuss housing in all its aspects, including the question of the availability of materials and the question of the supply of labour, which is by no means a problem of small dimensions and which will be of greater dimensions in the future. That conference could suggest what steps should be taken, arising out of the new arrangement in connection with subsidies and grants, to speed up the housing drive which is so badly needed at present. That was the principal reason for my rising in this debate. The members of the city council with which I am associated are keenly interested in all aspects of the housing question.

May I bring to the Minister's attention the scheme known as the riverside walk scheme on the Tolka, which has hung fire for a very considerable time? It gave promise of very good things when it was first introduced. This scheme falls under two heads—firstly, the question of the cleaning of the River Tolka in its lower reaches and secondly, the improvement scheme which was envisaged as a riverside walk park for a very considerable stretch up along the river and calculated to provide a delightful amenity.

I think the Minister will agree that both schemes can be run independently. Certain plans regarding, the improvement scheme were submitted to the Department from the Town Planning Committee of the Dublin Corporation. Those plans were not as comprehensive or as complete as all concerned would desire, due to the fact that for some months past that particular department has been practically denuded of technical staff, due again to the fact that it has been found difficult as between the Local Government Department and the corporation to assess the scale of salaries which the technical staff should receive in that particular department.

Here again, I understand that the position is righting itself at the present time. An advertisement is appearing now for a planning assistant and other assistants, but whether we will get the individuals required at the salaries indicated is something on which I can not comment, except to say that, side by side with that advertisement, there are advertisements appearing within the last two days for architects for Government Departments, at higher salaries than were permitted in the case of the Town Planning Department of the Dublin Corporation and it is pretty safe to assume that the corporation will have difficulty in getting the staff they desire. I suggest to the Minister to expedite the completion of the staff there, as the shortage has prevented the present staff from devoting their time to projected schemes of improvement which would give valuable employment. The existing staff left there had to confine themselves to the ordinary day to day routine work, which flowed in on them very heavily during the last couple of months.

The plans in connection with the riverside walk were not as complete or as far advanced as we would have liked, for the reason I have given, but they had advanced to the stage when a beginning could have been made with safety. Here again, I urge the Minister to give the necessary sanction for those portions of the scheme which are complete and which can be begun without interfering in any way with the remainder of the scheme or its ancillary.

In connection with the cleansing of the River Tolka, I would regard that as a matter of urgency, since at present, particularly at low water, it is in a shocking condition and at certain times indeed it might be regarded as a menace to public health. I suggest that there are difficulties which indeed are not of the Minister's making, as it so happens that another Department is concerned. If I mention that, I do so so that the Minister and his staff may take cognisance of the position and try to get it put right at the earliest possible moment. There was a weir which served the old Dublin whiskey distillery in the river down below Tolka Bridge and a question arises as to the ownership and maintenance of that particular weir. The corporation were anxious to invoke Section 31 of the Fisheries Act, 1939, to determine the responsibility for the maintenance of that weir, as a preliminary to proceeding with the scheme, that is, with the cleansing. I understand that that matter has been held up in the Department of Agriculture for a pretty considerable time. As the Minister's own Department has gone a considerable distance to ensure that this scheme might be begun, I suggest that it should not be impossible, by an arrangement between the two parties, to get over the difficulty that lies now with the Department of Agriculture. I repeat that it is a matter of urgency for public health reasons and because of the physical difficulties that might be entailed later. It is obvious that the cleansing of a river should be begun at a period such as the present and certainly should not be delayed beyond September or October.

Finally, on the Local Government Bill, I referred to the question of the audits of local authorities. The Minister indicated then that he was taking steps to have the arrears—which, apparently, had accumulated, for reasons I do not understand—cleared. In his statement on this particular Vote, he has given figures to show that that clearance has been effected, except to a comparatively small degree. I would like to know from him if, in the arrears to which he refers, where the clearances have taken place, his figures relate to annual audits following annual inspections. Members of local authorities and subsidiary bodies will readily agree that, when the position of the annual audit has been brought up to date, it would be extremely desirable that a shorter period should be instituted, say a six months' period, if that were physically possible, to protect the interests of the public authorities and make for better efficiency so far as the staffs and all others are concerned.

Mr. Bartley

The present Minister for Local Government takes a very keen interest in everything that refers to local government. He has brought a good deal of energy to bear on the administration of his Department, with very good results in various directions. For that reason, it is with confidence that Deputies bring to his notice matters which require attention in various constituencies. I would like to draw his attention to one or two matters which I have been asked to ventilate here. One of them is the very slippery condition of the road surfaces, particularly in the near approaches to Galway City. Farmers complain very bitterly about the difficulty they have in driving their horses over those surfaces, particularly where there is an incline. Galway City is a large market town, and there is continuous traffic of farm carts into the town and out from it and very often serious accidents take place as a result of the bad condition of the surface for horse traffic. Another disability that arises from that position is that, very often, farmers have to pick and choose the parts of the road on which their horses can travel with safety, and this often brings them into conflict with the Gárda authorities. It is not uncommon to hear of prosecutions for driving their vehicles on the wrong side of the road. It ought to be possible to find some solution whereby farmers will be served, while keeping a proper surface on the roads for general traffic. This matter has been brought to the Minister's notice by other parties, and I feel certain that it will receive attention. I want on this occasion to renew my representations regarding it.

Another matter with which, I think, the Minister may be acquainted concerns the views of our constituents about labourers' cottages. The view has been expressed that these cottages, as far as possible, should be built not in rows but singly. I know that it is more costly to build single cottages, but the Minister and his advisers will readily recognise the advantage of not having them bunched together in groups. Possibly there would not be any objection to having them in pairs, but it would be preferable if they were built singly. In areas where turf has been always the fuel generally used, I think the Department should see that the fireplaces provided are suitable for the burning of turf. Some of the fireplaces that I have seen are too small for decent turf fires.

I wish to direct the Minister's attention to another matter which refers to the exercise by county managers of their functions. When boards of health were in existence they were informed that they had no function in regard to the appointment of clerks of works and temporary engineers. I remember a case where a nursing home in Galway was being built, and the board of health appointed a person who had proved himself efficient in similar jobs, but the consulting architect objected, and wanted a man from his office appointed. He said he would not accept responsibility for the due performance of the work unless he was permitted to have his own nominee. The board of health were satisfied with the man they appointed, and they as well as the T.Ds. for the county made representations to the Minister for Local Government at the time. The then Minister said that the architect must be permitted to appoint the clerk of works as, being responsible for the due carrying out of the specifications, it would obviously be unfair to compel him to accept a deputy of whom he did not fully approve. I have seen a circular that was issued with regard to this matter.

Recently an engineer was recommended by a consulting engineer for the carrying out of waterworks at Woodford, County Galway. I am aware that that recommendation was not accepted by the county manager, and that a different person was appointed. Is there the same obligation on the manager to carry out the Department's instructions as there is in regard to similar matters on the part of locally elected bodies, such as boards of health when they were in existence? I understand that, in fact, an officer of the Department was associated with the manager in having the recommendation of the consulting engineer turned down and a substitute appointed.

We are not now as familiar with the carrying out of the functions of the manager as we were with the proceedings of local boards, as the only information the public usually get is a record of an order made on the books of a local authority, while the background of a particular proceeding is very seldom shown up. In the old days if there was the slightest irregularity it got a headline in the local newspapers. Everything was given due prominence and a report was made by officials who were quite independent in respect of it. Now the person who makes the decision also makes the report to the Department, and if appointments of this sort can be held up in this hugger-mugger way, then the Minister's job in "putting the Managerial Act over to the public," and getting it accepted as something that would end what was often denounced as jobbery makes the position doubly difficult.

The safeguard in the old days was that there was publicity, as local papers delighted in giving the fullest publicity to anything they thought was irregular, or that savoured of jobbery. They are not now in the same position as regards publicity as they do not know the facts, and have no means of getting information. It is quite possible that they would be afraid to comment in the same way now, as they might leave themselves open to serious consequences. I suffer from the same disadvantage as the newspapers. I cannot tell the Minister all the details of this case, but I know that a certain person was recommended by the consulting engineer and that the recommendation was not carried out. I understand that the Minister has not sanctioned anything so far with regard to this matter. If the Minister is going to allow himself to be a rubber stamp he will be making the job of getting the Managerial Act accepted for what he said it was a much more difficult one.

I take a very serious view of this, in view of the great privileges and powers which the Act has conferred on the manager. There is, as the Minister knows, very serious criticism of this Managerial Act. It has been described and denounced, amongst his own supporters as well as amongst his opponents, as a piece of dictatorial legislation, and if, when a complaint of this sort is made, when it is pointed out that the manager has not fulfilled the law and when that complaint is brought to the notice of the Department, the Minister does not take action, the Managerial Act will create a much worse impression than that which already obtains in regard to it. I have felt it my duty to bring to the Minister's notice matters which were brought to my attention as a public representative, with a request that I should refer to them on the Estimate for the Department here publicly. Having done that, I think I have discharged my duty.

It is up to the Minister in the interest of the fair administration of this Act, which is a novel feature of local government legislation, and in the interest of getting a reasonable chance for it to prove itself a worthy and acceptable instrument, not to let a complaint of this sort pass, to see to it that any complaints of irregularities or illegalities on the part of people who are regarded as his functionaries—and no matter what we may say, these managers are regarded as functionaries of the Minister—will be inquired into, and whatever has been wrongly done will be set to rights. I request the Minister to look into this matter, and, if the suspicions held by the people who brought the matter to my notice are found to be unwarranted, no one will be more pleased than I.

With regard to the sanatorium in Galway, difficulties have recently arisen with regard to the domestic staffing of the institution. I am told that the county medical officer of health and the matron have actually had to serve meals to the patients. I know that there has been a difficulty for some time back in getting maids, but in this case I think it is due to the fact that adequate wages have not been offered to maids who have presented themselves for employment there. I have been informed that four of them arrived there from a distance, but when their bus fares would not be recouped to them, they went away and got other employment in the town of Galway. There are 76 patients at present in the sanatorium and it is too bad that the manager will not make every effort to see that this institution, which has done an enormous amount of good work, is adequately staffed.

It is not true to say that maids cannot be got, because, as I say, four turned up, but, because of the niggardly way in which they were treated, they hoisted their sails, and went off and got what they regarded as better employment. I should like the Minister to give his personal attention to this matter. There are other complaints with regard to the sanatorium, but I do not wish to go into them now. The county medical officer of health there has done trojan work since he took over the duties, but it should not be for him to do the work which maids can easily enough be got to perform. Having said so much about it, I trust the Minister to make inquiries into it and I am quite satisfied that he will give it due and proper attention.

Mr. Roddy

Evidently, portion of the Minister's speech on this Estimate was intended to be delivered as a speech in the Cork by-election, because obviously the views he expressed about the work and the achievements of his colleague in the Department under a previous Government were intended for the cross-roads. As Deputy Hughes has pointed out, the Minister went out of his way to misrepresent Deputy Mulcahy and the work he did during the time he was in charge of the Department. The Minister selected the year 1931 for the purpose of instituting a comparison between the achievements of the Department to-day and the achievements in that year.

Let us carry the comparison a little further than the Minister carried it. In 1931, the expenditure on the Department was £517,000, while to-day we are spending £2,686,000 on local government administration. The costliest Department is the Department of Industry and Commerce and this Department comes next. The rates collectable in 1931 amounted to £5,208,139, while to-day the rates collectable amount to between £8,600,000 and £8,800,000, while, according to the Minister's statement, the staff of the Department has increased from 255 in 1931 to 482 in 1946.

Let us ask ourselves this question: Is the country getting value for that huge expenditure of money and for that very big staff? I can only regard the Minister's speech as an apologia for the wilful extravagance which has taken place in his Department from 1932 onwards. If one compares the work done in local government from 1922 to 1931 and takes into consideration the difficulties and handicaps of those early years, one will find that the country got far better value from the Department during the first ten years of the existence of the Free State Government than it has got since.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I thought we had got away from 1931 and 1932.

Mr. Roddy

I am dealing with the Minister's statement and I submit that I am perfectly in order in replying to the Minister.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy will remember that we had great difficulty in getting the Minister to come forward to 1946.

Mr. Roddy

We are discussing the Estimate for the Department of Local Government and Public Health, and surely I am entitled to institute a comparison between the work of the Department from 1922 to 1931 and from 1931 to the present day.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

By way of passing.

Mr. Roddy

Surely, that forms part of the discussion. I submit that the people of this country got far better value from the administration of the Department of Local Government during those years than it has ever got since. The Minister specifically mentioned housing in his statement. Even on the question of housing, if you examine the figures for those years, taking into consideration the amount of the grants given by the Department of Local Government which, I think, amounted to £2,500,000 and the amount of money contributed by local authorities, which amounted to £2,550,000, in conjunction with the amount of money spent by private builders—and, after all, the Government of that day did encourage private builders and their aim was to get as many houses as possible built by private builders and private enterprise—you will find that on housing alone the huge sum of £11,000,000 was spent during that period from 1922 to 1933. We can all recall the difficulties of that very early period; we can all recall the handicaps that that young Government had to surmount. Yet, despite all these handicaps and all these difficulties, they spent an average of £1,000,000 a year on housing alone. The present occupant of the post of Minister for Local Government went out of his way in this House yesterday evening to pour ridicule on the Minister who was in charge of the Department of Local Government during those difficult years and on the Minister who achieved such a noble work despite the almost insurmountable handicaps with which he was faced. I think it is disgraceful that in this year, 1946, a Minister of another Government Party should use his position in introducing the Estimate for his Department for the purpose of pouring ridicule and contempt on his predecessor.

I submit that the Department of Local Government is badly in need of reorganisation and badly needs to be completely revolutionised at the present time. Furthermore, I say that it is my considered opinion that the Department has become less efficient since the present Minister went into it than it was before he went into it. There are widespread complaints from all parts of the country about the difficulties and delays in regard to sanctions for schemes and works submitted to the Department of Local Government. In my own county there were a couple of schemes submitted to the Department of Local Government and it took that Department a year and a half to sanction them; they were a reconstruction and a rebuilding work respectively. I can give the particulars to the Minister.

Mr. MacEntee

Give them to me.

Mr. Roddy

In the same way housing schemes have taken six, 12, or 18 months, and sometimes two years, before they have received sanction by the Minister.

Mr. MacEntee

Why should the Deputy not give the particulars now?

Mr. Roddy

I will give them if you like. One is in connection with a building works submitted by the Sligo Corporation and the other was a scheme for the reconstruction of the Sligo Courthouse, portion of which was burnt down some three or four years ago.

Mr. MacEntee

Could the Deputy give me some further particulars about the building schemes?

Mr. Roddy

Is it any wonder there are widespread complaints about delays which are occurring in the carrying out of housing projects? Surely, as time goes on and work increases in the Department it is inevitable under the present policy that the Department will become more and more cluttered up with work and applications for sanction. Is it not time for the Minister to devote his attention to his Department instead of abusing his colleagues and his predecessors? Surely, it is time for him to devote himself to a thorough examination of the problem of local administration for the purpose of finding out in what respect it is possible to simplify it, and make it more efficient and thereby give the people of the country more satisfaction than they are getting at the present time under the present administration.

After all, in practically every county at the present time you have a replica of the Department of Local Government. You have county managers and county councils which can only be regarded as branches of the Custom House. Why should it be necessary, in view of the fact that the county manager is acting directly under the instructions and guidance of the Minister and his Department, for county managers to submit every tuppenny-halfpenny scheme to the Department of Local Government for sanction? Is it not time for the Minister to consider the advisability of making some effort at decentralisation both in regard to expenditure and in regard to the carrying out of the work? If responsibility is definitely placed on these men for the carrying out of small schemes up to a limited expenditure of £200, £300 or £500 you can rest assured that they will see that the money is not misspent in any way and that the work is carried out efficiently; and the country as a whole and the ratepayers to whom they are responsible will get every satisfaction as regards the manner in which the work is carried out. I submit it is time the Minister devoted his time and attention and thought to that aspect of the problem of local administration for the purpose of simplifying the whole procedure, and getting a more efficient and expenditious administration than we have at the present time. If the Minister calls together a conference of county managers in some back room in the Custom House and discusses this problem with them I am quite certain that they will put up very helpful and very constructive proposals for the purpose of assisting him in simplifying the whole administration of his Department. If the Minister is not prepared to do that, then I submit that some successor to him will have to do it; otherwise I see no hope of expediting the work of local government.

The Minister made capital at the expense of his predecessor in relation to the increases in his staff. Surely, the Minister is not serious when he advances as proof of the efficiency of the Department of Local Government that the staff has increased from 255 to 482. An increase in staff is no indication of an increase in efficiency. My recollection of the Department of Local Government is that, as additional work is thrown upon it, the staff is automatically increased without any examination of any kind into the possibility of reorganising or rearranging other Departments with a view to ascertaining if it would be possible for them to undertake or assist with this additional work. The staff is increased in a more or less haphazard way with no regard to the question of expenditure and no regard to the question of efficiency. I think the time has come when a general overhaul should be made, not only of the Department of Local Government but of all other Government Departments because staffs have grown at an enormous rate during the emergency period. It was perhaps inevitable that staffs would be got together in a more or less haphazard fashion. The problem of getting rid of these staffs is going to be a difficult one and it is one which will require expert guidance and expert help in order to bring back the staffing of Government Departments to normal levels. What I am going to say now is to some extent outside the scope of the discussion on local government; I think that some departmental committee should be set up for the purpose of inquiring into the question of staffing, not only in the Department of Local Government but in all Departments of State, with the object of bringing the numbers back in course of time to a fairly normal level. I do not say that that is something which can be done speedily or quickly because it is something which might cause dissatisfaction and which might possibly be unfair to present members of the staff. But something must be done in this direction.

The Minister twitted his predecessor about the small amount of money which he had spent on social welfare schemes as compared with the amount which is provided for in this Estimate. I think the amount he mentioned in the course of his statement was something in the region of £1,700,000 odd whereas the amount for a smaller number of schemes provided for in the 1931 Estimate was in the region of £664,000 odd. I wonder is the Minister serious in advancing that as an argument in favour of a better, more superior and more efficient administration than that which prevailed in 1931? Could not that argument be turned against himself in order to show that this increased expenditure is warranted merely because of the maladministration of the Fianna Fáil Government during all these years and that this small expenditure in 1931 was due to the good, sound and efficient administration of the previous Government? In 1931 you had no emigration and practically no unemployment problem. Taxation, both local and national, only amounted to £27,000,000. There was no poverty. There was no starvation. There was, in fact, no occasion for these welfare schemes. There was no justification for them; and I doubt very much if there is sufficient justification at the present time for some of them. I think that, while some of these schemes may be advisable and necessary, some of them are definitely degrading and demoralising for our people.

They are sapping their self-reliance and self-respect and their efficiency in some other respects. I am glad to think that the administration of which I was a member from 1927 to 1931 never had anything to do with such schemes and never had occasion to introduce schemes of that nature. The conditions were so favourable, the circumstances were so good despite the withering depression of the years from 1930 to 1932, that it was not necessary to introduce welfare schemes of that description. The figure which the Minister estimates for social welfare schemes is really a terrible condemnation of the Fianna Fáil policy. It is the strongest condemnation of that policy that one could possibly have that it is necessary to introduce schemes of this nature in order to provide for the unfortunate people of this country who have been reduced to that condition by the mismanagement and misgovernment of Fianna Fáil.

From that, the Minister proceeded to housing and he told us, despite the revolutionary change that has taken place in conditions, that the grants and subsidies are still based on the 1932 Act. If we are to have an adequate housing policy, surely it is absolutely essential that there should be some change in policy in respect of grants and subsidies. Conditions have fundamentally changed since 1932 and it is not likely that, during our lives at all events, conditions will revert to what they were in 1932. It is rather unusual, following any war, that conditions would just go back to what they were in any particular year before the outbreak of hostilities. It is most unlikely, as I say, that conditions will ever revert again to what they were in 1932.

Therefore, I do submit that there is justification for an increase, not only in the grants but in the subsidies as well, and that this policy of drawing on the transition development fund for the purpose of assisting house building is not sound. Housing should be subsidised by itself as distinct from the fund which the Minister for Finance established under the Finance Bill. I cannot see that there is any difference between increasing the subsidies and grants and drawing on the transition development fund for the purpose of making additional grants and subsidies as they may be required. In any event, if the grants as they are under the 1932 Act, were increased, it would be far greater inducement to local authorities and private individuals to embark on house building than the present arrangement of providing the 1932 grants and then drawing on the transition development fund for the purpose of additional grants and additional subsidies if the circumstances justify additional grants and subsidies. To obtain additional grants, conditions which the Minister will lay down must be fulfilled and, judging by what he said to-day, these conditions will be fairly rigid and, in many cases, perhaps, the applicants for additional assistance may not fulfil the conditions. I submit most earnestly that the Minister should review the question of housing grants and subsidies. The time is opportune for a revision of the subsidies and grants under the 1932 Act. I do not regard the system of helping building operations out of the transition development fund as satisfactory. The fund can be used for other development purposes. Housing is a separate and distinct problem. Its finances should be separate and distinct from the finances of any other Government Department. It should have nothing whatever to do with the transition development fund, which is an ephemeral fund which may be in existence for only a few years. Housing should rest on its own basis and should be separate and distinct from any other Government enterprise. It is in the interest of the Government that that should be so. If housing is financed on the right lines and in the manner I have suggested, I believe there would be a considerable inducement, not only to local authorities, but to private individuals who will be anxious, when conditions get normal, to embark on house building.

When does the Minister anticipate that building materials will become plentiful or that there will be a normal supply of building materials of various descriptions? From what the Minister for Industry and Commerce said in the Dáil about a fortnight ago, from what we read in the papers and from what we learn from those engaged in the building trade, it appears that it may be three or four years before the supply of building material will be anything approaching normal. In the meantime it seems to me we will be paying through the nose, or shall I say, through the transition development fund, for whatever building operations will be undertaken by local authorities and other people. Even without the aid of the transition development fund, public authorities, urban authorities especially, have to subsidise housing to a considerable extent in order to bring the rents down to a reasonable figure and, despite the reduction in the price of money from 4½ per cent. to 2½ per cent., and the aid of the fund, they will have to continue to subsidise building enterprise on a greater scale in the future than they have ever done in the past. The whole housing position needs to be re-examined. I do not think that the Minister's policy, as he outlined it to-day, will be likely to lead to any great increase in house building until building prices come down and materials become much more plentiful.

The Minister also had a tilt at his predecessor in regard to town planning. I am speaking from recollection, and subject to contradiction, when I say that Deputy Mulcahy was responsible for the idea of town planning in the first instance and there was some development in the implementation of town planning during his period of office. The Minister, or, at least, his Party, have been in power for 15 years and I should like to hear from the Minister what has been done during those 15 years for the purpose of giving effect to the town planning which he speaks about so glibly. It appears to me that practically nothing has been done about town planning, or, at least, very little has been done, certainly, in the smaller towns throughout the country, since 1932. It is a pity that some steps were not taken earlier to induce urban authorities to undertake town planning schemes during the past 15 years.

Some of the finest and most beautiful spots in this country, entrances, as a matter of fact, to towns, have been defiled by the kind of houses that have been erected, without regard for the beauty of the district. The Minister gave no indication as to what his policy is in town planning for the future. Is town planning to be held up until all the post-war development schemes are put into operation? Are no steps to be taken to see that houses, especially in the neighbourhood of towns, are built in accordance with certain schemes which will be approved by the local authorities in the first instance and, I presume, by the Department of Local Government? I would like to hear the Minister developing this question of town planning somewhat more than he did last evening. Perhaps he will tell us what he proposes to do, apart from whatever arrangements he may have made in connection with post-war building schemes.

I mentioned some moments ago that the Department of Local Government needed reorganisation. The Minister confirmed that because, towards the end of his speech, he said he found it necessary to make certain changes for the purpose, I assume, of increasing the efficiency of the Department. I hope he will continue to make changes until he is satisfied that the Department is really an efficient Department and that it is giving the service which the people are entitled to get from it.

He then proceeded to give his usual lecture to local authorities. I cannot understand why the Minister should waste his breath lecturing local authorities, in view of the fact that they do not enjoy any authority whatsoever. They have the right to strike the rates, but I submit they have no authority to do anything else. The real authority is exercised by the county manager. The local authorities, when they assemble, have nothing more than the status of debating societies. They may discuss things, but they cannot make any decision; the decision rests with the county managers. Why should the Minister continue endeavouring to create the illusion that local authorities enjoy some real authority? I do not know why he adopts that attitude. If he wants to get the local authorities to respond to his requirements, let him call the county managers together and tell them what he wants. If he does that, you can rest assured that his demands will be attended to with promptitude. It is becoming too much of a joke to hear the Minister, not only to-day but on other occasions, lecturing local authorities on their duties and responsibilities. Actually, they have no responsibilities and, that being so, it cannot be said that they have any duties.

Deputy Blowick referred to roads. I am not interested so much in the main or trunk roads as I am in roads that might be described as cul-de-sac roads. I mean roads that have an opening but no exit. According to the Local Government Act, no money can be spent on a cul-de-sac. There are numbers of those roads, and some county managers have decided that, according to the existing law, there is no authority to spend money on the repairing of them. Perhaps the Minister will see if something can be done to deal with these roads. Perhaps he will permit the county managers to spend money on them in order to keep them in repair. Some of these roads are of very great importance. They accommodate numbers of people, but because of the peculiar wording of the section of the Local Government Act some county managers—the county manager in Sligo, at all events—have decided they have no authority to spend money on them. I hope the Minister will do something to facilitate the people who use these cul-de-sac roads.

Mr. Corish

I listened to the Minister's statement and, while agreeing that he did give us some idea of the plans of his Department for the future, I do not think he was very helpful either to the House or to the country by the type of speech he made. I was very disappointed when he made only a slight passing reference to what I regard as the kernel of local government administration, and that is county management. I was under the impression that we were to have some change in the County Management Act, but the system is the very same now as when it was introduced in 1942. It still has many objectionable features.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy might not be aware that legislation may not be discussed, nor may the amending of legislation be discussed, on an Estimate. The Deputy may discuss the administration of the Act, but not its merits nor any amendment of it.

Mr. Corish

I expected from the Minister a review of the working of the county management system. My suggestion is—and I am sure it has been suggested many times since the Act came into operation—that the manager should be the manager to the council and not of the council. It has been proved that members of local authorities are utterly ineffective as regards public administration. From my own knowledge I am aware that local representatives, who have a particular interest in their counties and towns and are conversant with the state of affairs which exists in their own areas, are the men who can put forward complaints in a very effective manner, but their efforts, although the complaints were put forward on many occasions, are quite useless from the point of view of getting the manager to act.

County management does not lend itself to proper local administration. To my mind it is a question of the county manager versus his officials. County managers are very human. I imagine if I were one I would be very reluctant to reprimand any of the officials with whom I work day after day. Before 1942 you had a body of men who comprised the county council or the corporation and, as a body, they accused or reprimanded the officials and it was not a question then of a man to man complaint; no particular man had to take the responsibility for such complaints. Now you have the manager, who might have occasion to reprimand any of his clerical staff or his engineers or doctors, but I am sure he would be very reluctant to do so. The result is that there are members of staffs of local bodies inclined to play upon this and, consequently, there is not the efficiency that there should be in local government. The Minister should review the position brought about by the County Management Act and he should try to bring about changes for the betterment of the administration of local affairs.

I am naturally interested in the staffs of public bodies. One thing about which local government officials were very sore was that they received a notification in the past year prohibiting them from making representations to public representatives who, in turn, would make representations or inquiries on their behalf in the Department. I do not think that is fair. It is not a question of making representations with a view to getting any favours. When a Deputy has occasion to call to the Local Government Department about any particular member of the staff of a local body, he usually goes to find out if such an officer can get a change in his or her terms of employment or to find out the results of certain proposals which have been sent to the Department for sanction.

There is all the more reason for that at the present time because I am sure the Minister will admit that there is no uniformity in the scales of wages or conditions of employment of local government officials. An officers' scheme was supposed to be introduced three or four years ago which would make the working conditions and scales of salary in every county council, corporation or urban council in the country more or less uniform. Certain counties have already sent up their officers' schemes. They have sent up a few drafts of these schemes. The Minister is apparently of opinion that these counties must wait until officers' schemes have been submitted by every county in the country. I do not think that is fair and I would urge the Minister to sanction such schemes as have been submitted to him. If a county like Wexford or Kerry has sent in a scheme there is no earthly reason why the scheme should not be applied to these counties without waiting until other counties sent in their schemes. I believe that a model scheme was submitted either from Dundalk or Drogheda and it was intended that this scheme should operate throughout the country. I believe that the scheme was a little generous to officials and it was consequently turned down.

I would also urge the Minister to consider another very important subject, namely, the length of time which higher public officials should stay in a county to which they are appointed. At the present time we are faced with the threatened resignation from the service of the Wexford County Council of our county medical officer of health, our county engineer and, I think, another of our higher officials also intends to go to another county. That is not fair to Wexford and would not be fair to any other county. To take the case of one of these officials, the county engineer, he came to Wexford about nine or 12 months ago and, as new brushes will do, he tried to sweep clean. He tried to change certain of the systems in operation in County Wexford regarding the repair of cottages, and the repair of roads. Generally he did make a very big change. These changes necessitated a trial of about six months, during which engineering services in the county were somewhat at sixes and sevens. I will not say that they were absolutely upset but the road workers, the staff generally and the tenants of cottages were upset for six months. In the last three or four months the system has been working fairly well but now this engineer is about to leave the county after nine or ten months in Wexford.

We are going to be left without a permanent engineer for another nine or 12 months. Then we shall get a new engineer who will probably remain for another 12 months. At the end of that time he may look for another job and we shall have to look once more for an engineer. The advent of these new engineers will necessitate a further change of system and, in consequence, the people in general will suffer.

I urge the Minister that he should insist that professional men like engineers, doctors, surveyors, or architects who take up positions under public bodies should be required to remain for at least a period of two years in the area to which they are appointed. We do not deny the right of any professional man to try to better himself, but I do not think that the Minister should insist that he should play fair, so to speak, with the county for which he works and that he should give a proper return for the time he is there. He should remain in the post for a minimum period of something like two years, so as to avoid changing systems all over the place. I suppose that the system operated by the new county medical officer of health will be somewhat different from that in operation at present. The department of the county secretary, if he goes—and I believe he may go in the near future— will be turned upside down and that will react on the whole staff and the administration of the county in general. It is not merely a matter of hearsay, because I have a little experience of the Wexford County Council and know how upsetting these changes can be. I think it is generally admitted by the staff that they are upsetting.

There is a general complaint, I am sure, from all over the country, as there is in Wexford, about the length of time it takes the Department to reply to communications from public bodies and to get sanction for appointments. In consequence of that delay, the administration is upset while the Local Government Department sits on these communications, considering whether it will or will not sanction certain proposals.

In that connection, may I say that I believe a post-war planning scheme was sent up from Wexford quite a long time ago and the Wexford Corporation are still waiting to know what has happened to it? The same remarks apply to the proposed new park in Wexford town and in regard to the proposal for the erection of a new bridge near the town of Wexford. There are very many matters of this kind upon which the Department just sits, keeping the town and County of Wexford waiting.

Housing is, I suppose, the big feature in local government. The Minister told us what he had done for the last 15 years. He made comparisons with what the Fine Gael Government did during its term of office. I think it was wholly unfair to compare his programme with the programme carried out by Fine Gael. The country and this House are not interested in what Fine Gael did. Personally, I am not. I have no complaint to make about their administration, but what we are all concerned about at the present time is what this Government are going to do.

Promises were made that the number of houses would be increased in the future, but that did not happen. In point of fact a pessimistic note was struck about housing because the Minister for Local Government, the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Industry and Commerce have told us time and again in the last few months that materials for housing are so scarce it is not anticipated that we can have any certain programme for housing. I admit there is a shortage of housing materials, but I suggest to the Government that they should explore other possibilities. Mention has been made of prefabricated houses. I am not recommending to the Minister that he should start building them right away.

The suggestion made in regard to them should be considered, and steps taken to ascertain whether such houses will last for any length of time— whether they can be built at an economic price, and whether it is feasible to build them in this country. That, surely, is a matter that is worthy of consideration. Apart from the figures that have been given and the talk that we have heard about subsidies, as well as the aid which local authorities can get from the transition fund, the plain fact remains that the people in the country—I am sure that the same applies in the City of Dublin—are clamouring for houses. We have people living in houses which would not be fit for animals to live in. When a house under a local authority becomes vacant, whether it be a labourer's cottage or a dwelling in the town, we have 30 or 40 applicants for it. The promises made in this House, as well as reference to all that the Minister has done in the last 15 years, are not sufficient for the people in 1946 who want houses. Every avenue should be explored with a view to finding some means of providing houses for the people.

I was glad to hear Deputy Hughes make an appeal for some sort of preference, not a first preference, for newly-married couples who are so badly in need of houses. We know that certain conditions must be complied with before a family can get a house. That is why I say some kind of preference should be given to newly-married couples. The fact that they cannot get a house keeps many young people from getting married. If they do get married they do not want to live for any length of time with the in-laws on either side. It is not very nice. I would appeal to the Minister to give a direction on the matter of houses for newly-married couples. I believe that he does give directions to public authorities in regard to the letting of houses. It would be well, I think, if he were to give a direction that, say, a certain percentage of the houses in an area should be let to newly-married couples.

I would like the Minister to take note of a complaint which is fairly general in my part of the country in regard to the collection of rents. I would not like to make a direct accusation, but I am sure that in some cases it is true that the collector of rents of labourers' cottages insists, or at least asks, the tenants to leave the rents at some convenient place for him. He does not call to collect. At the appointed place he is handed the rents from 20, 30 or 40 houses. I think that is absolutely wrong. The title of his office indicates that the rent collector should go to each house to collect the rents. He should not ask the tenant to leave the rents at a publichouse or some other place where it is convenient for him to collect them. I think that the means test can be discussed on this Vote.

An Ceann Comhairle

There is a special Vote which has not been discussed.

Mr. Corish

I thought that four or five Votes were being taken together.

An Ceann Comhairle

They have not been discussed. So far as I know, no Deputy has discussed anything outside of local government. The matter that the Deputy has referred to will arise on the Old Age Pensions Vote. That is not on this list.

Mr. O'Leary

Before a person can get the old age pension now it must be sanctioned by the Minister for Local Government.

Mr. MacEntee

No.

An Ceann Comhairle

The means test does not arise on this Vote.

Mr. Corish

What about the investigating officers?

An Ceann Comhairle

That would arise on the Old Age Pensions Vote. The Deputy will have another day on that.

Mr. Corish

The Minister, in a sane hour to-day, gave us a statement about the treatment of tuberculosis. I believe the disease is on the increase, due to the bad administration of local government in general. If a person has not a decent house, if the road worker has not a decent wage and if the agricultural labourer, who is so closely connected with the road worker, has not a decent wage, I think there is very little chance of this disease ever being eliminated. This may sound like talk from a crossroads platform, but that is the fact. It has been stressed not only by members of this House but by people outside, and until the Department of Local Government realises that fact it is just knocking its head against a stone wall.

While you have that situation, there is no use in talking about Public Health Bills or the eradication of tuberculosis which is a dreadful scourge. I think a special commission should be set up to inquire into the causes of it, and that I am right in saying the disease is peculiar to this country. Despite all our efforts: the efforts of the Red Cross, which is doing admirable work to combat the disease, the efforts of the local authorities and of the Department, we know that more and more people are dying from tuberculosis. There may be a decrease in the number of deaths this year or last year but, generally speaking, I think it is true to say that tuberculosis is on the increase. That is why I suggest a special commission should be set up to inquire into the causes of it with a view to its final eradication.

There is a local matter that I would like to bring to the notice of the Minister. The sanatorium for the County Wexford is situated at Enniscorthy. The unfortunate people who suffer from tuberculosis and who require an X-ray have, under present conditions, to be taken by ambulance from Enniscorthy to Wexford which is 14 miles distant. The X-ray apparatus at Wexford is not very good. I do not think that that is a good state of affairs. Tuberculosis is a disease which must be taken seriously. It is not right that any patient suffering from this dreadful disease should be asked to step out of his bed in the sanatorium, get into an ambulance, travel to the county hospital at Wexford, 14 miles away, and await his turn for X-ray. It is a shocking state of affairs that a county sanatorium, supposed to cater for the needs of 96,000 people, should not have X-ray equipment. We have been talking about portable X-ray apparatus for the City of Dublin. There is no use in talking about the portable apparatus when people have to travel 14 miles to be X-rayed.

I asked the Parliamentary Secretary on the Committee Stage of the Public Health Bill about the conveyance of patients in ambulances belonging to the county hospitals and district institutions and he assured me that tuberculous patients were not conveyed in these ambulances. I should like him to look into that matter again, because I think that it would bear some investigation. I know that it is not the general practice, but it would be unfortunate if it happened that even one person contracted tuberculosis by reason of being conveyed in an ambulance which had previously conveyed a tuberculous patient and which had not been fumigated. Deputy O'Leary has reminded me that Wexford was without a permanent assistant county medical officer of health for a long time. We all know that the assistant medical officer of health takes a particular interest in the treatment of tuberculosis. The Minister and his Department should insist that no county be left without an assistant county medical officer of health for so long a time as Wexford was without such an officer.

I should like to end on the note on which I opened. Our county manager is a reasonable man, who is prepared to listen to individuals and pay attention to commonsense arguments. But the job is too big for him. It is not reasonable to place the responsibility for a whole county, with two urban councils, a corporation and town commissioners, on one man. He simply cannot do all the work. How he copes with the amount of work which he does cope with is a mystery to me. I ask the Minister, at his next conference with county managers, to instruct them to take a little more notice of what local representatives say and of the complaints they formulate. Time and again complaints which go to a county manager are just noted. That is as far as they get. On certain occasions county managers will listen to the local representatives on county councils and corporations. These representatives are not "duds", as the Department of Local Government would have us believe.

If the Department of Local Government has no respect for the local representatives then, in a short time, the electorate will not have any respect for them, either. These are the men who should run the county. They are the men who receive complaints about bad patches of road, about a pump in disrepair or about a cottage which requires attention and they know the local conditions, because they are representative of every area in the county. The county manager cannot be expected to know every part of the county as the members of the council do. They are the men who should advise and, if their advice was more frequently acted upon, we should have a better form of local administration.

The county managers are tolerant inasmuch as they will listen to complaints but they just do not act. They are tolerant at the meetings of urban councils and corporations. The complaints, suggestions and advice at these meetings are noted but nothing happens. In the Corporation of Wexford, members of every party have complained to the county manager about the conditions of the roads in the town of Wexford. We used to boast about those roads. At present, despite the interest which the 12 members of the corporation display in the roads, the officials or the county manager or whoever is responsible refuse to act. One excuse for failing to repair a certain road is that a new sewerage system must be installed. If they put in the pipes for the sewerage, they state, they would not have the material for the road. Meanwhile, the roads are breaking up and in six or nine months a considerable amount of money will have to be expended on them in the county and the town of Wexford. That will constitute a burden which the ratepayers will find it hard to bear. My only appeal to the Minister is that he should insist that his managers listen to those who are elected by the people. These are the men chosen by the people and they are best fitted to advise the county manager.

Mr. Burke (County Dublin)

Listening to the various contributions to this debate, one would imagine that the Minister had millions of houses to give away and that he was making no attempt to help the housing problem. One would think that, during the past six years, the Department of Local Government had held up activities rather than tried to expedite them. That was really the position presented to the House by some of the speakers. It is very easy to talk about housing and to criticise the Minister at this particular time. No Minister, no matter who he might be—whether Labour or Fine Gael—could do any more than the Minister for Local Government has done for this country during his time in office. From my experience of the Department of Local Government and the Minister in charge of it, I think he is an asset to the country. He is a man with an original mind who is anxious to create sub-departments in his own Department, and under his own jurisdiction, for the benefit of the people. I heard some of the Opposition speakers talking about high taxation. Then, in the middle of their speeches, they said they wanted some increase for this, that or the ather. They reminded me of the play The Merchant of Venice, which I will not go into at the moment. It is very hard to blow hot and cold at the same time. While one Deputy will ask why certain things should not be done, another will say that the activities of the Department of Local Government have grown out of all proportion to the amount of money spent on it. One of the last speakers said that in 1932 we had no emigration, no poverty, no people starving and no unemployment.

Mr. O'Leary

You do not believe that?

Mr. Burke

I am just beginning to wonder was I alive in 1932 or maybe the part of the country I was in was badly affected, while where the Deputy lived probably was a paradise or a Utopia. I want to make a few observations on things in County Dublin as I have found them during the past 12 months. I am delighted that the Minister has agreed to build 1,300 council cottages in the county. The sooner he can get on with the work the better.

Mr. Hughes

Is it the Minister of the local authority that is building them?

Mr. Burke

The local authority, with the sanction of the Minister.

Mr. Davin

Are you sure he interferes at all?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy should not interfere, but should let Deputy Burke make his own speech.

Mr. Burke

If the Deputy will give me time, I will answer in a few moments. I am very pleased to hear that the Minister has increased the town-planning section of the Department, as I must say there was some work done in parts of my constituency on which definitely I have to make adverse criticism. The present Minister was not Minister for Local Government at the time this work was done, and I do not know who was responsible. In the Drimnagh and Crumlin areas, there are 60,000 or 70,000 people, and I would like to see the new town-planning body which the Minister has created provide, in a housing scheme of that kind, decent parks, a municipal or parish hall and a swimming pool. The people—and especially the children—of an area like that should have the amenities that are most desirable for modern tastes and ideas, and I would like the Minister to take note of that.

Another matter is the Baldoyle sewerage system. There are some 40 houses there, owned by the Dublin Corporation. I have already had correspondence with the Minister regarding them, and he has been dealing with the matter and so has the county commissioner; but I would like the matter to be expedited, as those 40 houses have neither sewerage nor water. The houses are small, and probably will have to be condemned, but the people of Baldoyle are pressing me regarding this matter.

The question of the sewage in Balbriggan going into the harbour has been a bone of contention for some time. The county commissioner has been dealing with it, and I would like that he should be given all possible help in expediting the matter. In County Dublin during the last 12 months, many bad drains have been piped. In some areas we have had outbreaks of fever during the last few years, and some residents would definitely attribute it to the bad, stagnant drains. I know that matter will be dealt with in the new Public Health Bill, but I am just referring to it in passing, so that, as far as possible, any of the stagnant drains in the area responsible for giving off any foul smell may be piped and put into properly filled-in ditches.

I am also very pleased to compliment the Minister for Local Government on the way he is expediting the building of dispensaries in County Dublin. Some of them were in a very bad way, and I am very pleased that he is taking that action.

Mr. Hughes

Is it the Minister or the local authority that is doing it?

Mr. Burke

The Minister is sanctioning it and hurrying it up. Of course, he has a good man there in the county commissioner.

Mr. MacEntee

He has not the Carlow County Council to deal with.

Mr. Hughes

It is a pity we cannot get him down to Carlow.

Mr. Brennan

When the Deputy is Minister, we will refer to him as the local authority.

Mr. Burke

I did not interefere with Deputy Hughes when he was making his speech.

Mr. Hughes

I am only helping the Deputy, by putting him on the right lines.

Mr. Burke

The dispensary areas around the city are a big problem, and I am not going to take up the time of the House in discussing them. However, one particular portion of my constituency, as far as dispensaries are concerned, is administered by the Dublin Board of Assistance and the greater part of the county is administered by the county commissioner. There again, the Minister has assured me that this is a matter he is going into very soon. We have the dispensary medical officer residing at Phibsborough and some of the poorer people in Finglas and St. Margaret's six or seven miles away, complain of the long distance they have to go to a dispensary doctor. We were trying from time to time to see if there was any possibility of dividing up the area and getting a dispensary doctor in a more central place. This is due to the city creeping out into the county, and vice versa.

Mr. Hughes

The county creeping into the city.

Mr. Burke

I am very pleased that the fire service in some of the towns in the county has been brought up to date during the last few years. I would like to see an efficient fire service in each town of a reasonable size. In regard to the water supply in the county, I understand there is a big scheme under consideration by the commissioner to bring the water, as far as he can manage it, to all the North County Dublin area. I understand that he has made provisions to bring water to the South County Dublin area also, with the Minister's sanction, to Newcastle, Milltown and up to Rathcoole. There are a few areas in the county where the people are very displeased that the commissioner cannot consider them at the moment. They are in the Bangor Road area in Clondalkin and in the whole area from Saggart to Tallaght. The people in these particular areas are very anxious to have the water mains brought along to their places also. The child welfare scheme was long overdue, and the Minister has the goodwill of every intelligent man and woman for introducing it. It will do much to improve the lot of those to whom it applies, and the Minister will go down in the history of this country as one who did something really worth while for the welfare of the children.

Listening to some of the speeches that were made during the debate one would imagine that the Department of Local Government and the Fianna Fáil Party generally were not concerned with the treatment of tuberculous patients. It seemed to be forgotten that only a short time ago the Government passed a Bill through this House to provide three large sanatoria for these patients. In addition, the Minister brought in a scheme by which tuberculous patients would be treated in their own homes, and providing that separate rooms for that purpose could be attached to their houses. That was forgotten in the speeches of the Opposition. I was very pleased with the provision of allowances for the sustenance of tuberculous patients who were receiving treatment. I am firmly convinced that if these patients cannot have mental rest while they are being treated their physical condition cannot improve. The action of the Minister in providing such allowances shows how considerate he has been for their welfare, and how farseeing the policy of Fianna Fáil has been in looking after the interests of the people.

Under the Fianna Fáil Administration great progress has been made with hospitalisation. I am delighted to know that the Minister for Local Government has during his period of office in the Department tried to have the position of the staffs of hospitals brought up to a decent standard. From what I heard from staffs in certain of the general hospitals recently I believe they are very satisfied with their employment, and that conditions have greatly improved. I want to ask the Minister about the possibility providing parish halls in County Dublin. I may be told that an enterprising parish committee should be able to undertake the erection of these halls in rural districts. The position in County Dublin and, I suppose, in other constituencies, is that if some kind of a grant could be made to local authorities for the provision of such halls, the amount to be repayable later, it would be a great help. When there is not a parish hall to cater for cultural and dramatic activities the people in rural areas are at a great disadvantage. I hope the present Minister for Local Government will continue in that Department for many years to carry on the good work he is doing for the country. The Opposition may not agree with that, but the country is very pleased with the Minister's work.

Mr. Browne

In his introductory statement the Minister referred to the period of office of a predecessor of his in that Department. I remember when the then Minister was in that office, and I am sure that every Deputy, including the present Minister for Local Government agrees that it was he started the housing schemes, and that he did so in a way that suited the pockets of the people. The housing programme has gradually grown in this State. The question always has been, how long would it take to meet the housing needs of the people. I believe if the Minister who was there at the start of these housing schemes had remained in office, we would have reached the stage we have reached to-day. Apart from that, I am glad to see that the Minister is making a good sum of money available for housing, because, in the interests of the health of the people, housing is one of our greatest needs. I find that the Minister has not made any mention of grants for farmers in rural areas who want to build new houses or for people who wish to reconstruct their houses. I believe that a large number of houses would be built in rural areas if in addition to the ordinary subsidy, people were given some grant to assist them to meet the increased cost of building. Many houses in rural areas must be reconstructed, as work of that kind has been held up for the last five or six years. The ordinary farmer who wants to improve his dwelling could not undertake the work with a maximum grant of £40. I believe that the Minister should make provision for a subsidy from the transition development fund for these two sections of the farming community.

When a house is condemned and a cottage built in a small town in a rural area the people are taken more or less to the outskirts of the town, the condemned house being left as an eyesore in the centre of the town. There are possibly several other houses in similar condition in different parts of the town and the Minister should do something to acquire these sites. He may say that a site in the town will cost more than a site outside, but, if he would acquire these sites, the houses would be more valuable and a higher rent could be obtained for them than could be obtained for a cottage 400 yards outside the town. Some such scheme would improve the centres of these towns.

With regard to roads, we have in County Mayo a huge mileage. That county is one of the five counties with the highest mileage of main and county roads. The trouble is that we also have a large number of by-roads. I know that by-roads are not relevant to this discussion, but I mention them with a view to pointing out to the Minister what happened in County Mayo. This matter of these by-roads is a very vexed question, so far as the local representatives are concerned. Year after year the local representatives have made representations with a view to getting a number of these roads under contract, but year after year the applications have been turned down. Various reasons have been given by the county manager, by the secretary in his time and by the county surveyor, one reason being that it would involve an increase in the rates. The local representatives agreed on that point and saw the danger. Another plea put up was that the roads were not of the specified width.

The difficulty is that with the huge mileage of main and county roads, there is an extraordinary big mileage of by-roads, which serve at least one-third of the farming community. These people have to travel possibly a mile in order to get out to a main or county road. It is not possible to have these roads repaired under a relief scheme, because the area does not qualify from the point of view of the number of registered unemployed. Repairs could be carried out under the rural improvements scheme, but the difficulty is that that scheme does not operate in the county, in that where six or seven people are involved, four may agree to contribute, while two refuse.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Department of Local Government is not responsible in that matter.

Mr. Browne

I am merely coming to the point that the county council unanimously agreed to put a levy of 4d. in the £1 on the rates to meet the expenditure involved in repairing these roads. The application was sent to the Department, but the Department refused to sanction it on the ground that it was illegal.

Mr. MacEntee

Of course, it was quite illegal.

Mr. Browne

If the Minister says it was illegal, I ask him if there is any hope of these people getting an accommodation road into their houses. I believe these people are as much entitled to these facilities from the main or county road into their houses as the motor owner or lorry owner is entitled to a road 25 to 30 feet wide. These are people who have to work very hard and in many cases have to pay fairly high rates. I suggest that the Minister will have to take up this matter himself some time, and I believe the suggestion put forward by the county council of a levy of 4d. in the £1 on rates and of a grant by the Department towards a scheme of repair of these roads was a good suggestion. If the Department would sanction that proposal, in ten years' time, we would have all these by-roads in fairly good condition. I think it was Deputy Allen who asked some time ago why Mayo did not put these roads under contract, but I should like the Minister to bear in mind that there was no year for the past ten or 12 years in which the members of the council did not send in a list of the roads which they wanted to get under contract. These, as I say, were turned down for various reasons. Unless this matter is taken in hands by the Department, these people will be left without a road, and I do not think they should be for ever left in that predicament.

With regard to the matter of supplementary allowances to old-age pensioners, I do not like the system, but it was a benefit to the people who got these allowances during the emergency. The system, however, is altogether wrong, and is not suited to the majority of old-age pensioners in rural areas. I know cases in my area in which old-age pensioners had to come in a distance of 10 miles for the purpose of making the application to the relieving officer. In addition, they have to come in once a week to collect the allowance, although, in the majority of cases in my district, they are getting an allowance of only 1/-. I understand that they can let the allowance run for three or four weeks, but the Minister should make some arrangement with the Minister for Finance; and this matter of a supplementary allowance in regard to old-age pensions should be decided in some other way and should be worked in a different manner from the way in which it was worked during the emergency. In conclusion, I want to say that if the Minister is generous with his grant for local government and housing schemes generally he is generous with the tax-payer's money.

Mr. MacEntee

That is agreed. I am not contesting that at all.

Mr. Browne

I know that. That is agreed. If we examine the rates and taxes collected from the people in the year 1945 we will find that there is £3,000,000 of a difference in the Estimate and the position is that we are now getting back £2,000,000 to £3,000,000 paid in excess in 1945.

Mr. Cogan

I regret very much that I had not the privilege of being present in the House last night when the Minister was introducing his Estimate. I, however, consulted the Irish Press this morning, which, I am sure, gives a reliable record of the Minister's observations. I gather that the Minister spent a considerable time in this House comparing conditions in his Department to-day with those which operated 15 years ago. I feel that that was hardly a useful way in which to occupy the time of this House. I feel that the Minister in adopting that attitude and that line of approach had one eye —and only one eye—on this House and another eye on the election in Cork City. His body may have been confined within the limits of this chamber but his spirit was perched on a soap box on the coal quays of Cork haranguing the Cork electors on the magnitude of the benefits which the Fianna Fáil Government had conferred upon them. I wonder what the Minister will think 15 years hence when he is perched on the back bench of one of the smaller Parties in this House listening to the Minister for Local Government comparing the conditions which then exist with the conditions which exist to-day.

Mr. MacEntee

Fifteen years hence I shall be quite reconciled to that.

Mr. Heskin

He will not be here.

Mr. Cogan

I wonder what he will think of the conditions which will he pictured as existing here to-day, the vast areas of slums in which a large section of our population are compelled to live in pestiferous conditions, the magnitude of the rural slums throughout the rural areas and the uninhabitable houses in which the people in those areas are compelled to live. I wonder will he then be so proud of the miserable conditions which he is at the present time enforcing on a large section of our unfortunate working population.

It has been pointed out—and very rightly pointed out—that there is very little point in comparing expenditure to-day with expenditure of a similar nature 15 years ago. The value of money to-day is very, very much lower than it was 15 years ago. When the Minister talks about having doubled expenditure on the treatment of tuberculosis, for example, we must remember that the money which is being utilised for that purpose to-day can hardly go much further than the money which was utilised for the same purpose 15 years ago.

In the same way, the Minister has been given credit and has taken upon himself credit and been applauded by some members of his own Party for the schemes of hospitalisation which have been carried out during the past 15 years notwithstanding the fact that these schemes of hospitalisation were made possible by the operation of a State lottery, which was introduced before the Minister came into power and which was denounced by the leader of his Party and by other members of his Party at that time. The Minister is in the happy position that both he and his admirers always claim credit for the desirable things which are done by local authorities and other bodies throughout the country; but when there is blame to be attached for failures in the advancement of our social services and social amenities generally the blame is always imputed to and placed upon the shoulders of the local authority. Now, the Minister cannot have it both ways and I hope that he will not be allowed to have it both ways in this House. If the local authorities are to be blamed for the failures and for the mistakes which are made in local administration then, too, they must be given full credit for the good work which has been done throughout local administration generally. They must be given full credit for hospitals, for the improvement in our public roads, and for whatever housing has been provided during the last 25 years. The Minister has indicated that 60,000 new houses are urgently required. He has also indicated that half this number of houses is required in the county boroughs and a little more than one-fourth of that 60,000 will be provided in the rural areas. Now we talk about a flight from the land. We talk about the emigration of our people; we talk about the migration of our people from the rural areas to the cities. Yet, we find now that we are embarking on a vast housing scheme in which only one-fourth of the houses to be provided will be allocated to the rural areas.

Mr. MacEntee

That is what the local authorities have told us they want.

Mr. Cogan

Of course, now once again we find the Minister shifting the blame back upon the local authorities.

Mr. MacEntee

They made the survey.

Mr. Cogan

This is a big national problem.

Mr. MacEntee

They made the survey.

Mr. Cogan

It is not a problem which can be dealt with piece-meal in a halfhearted way. This is a problem to which I referred briefly last year and upon which the Minister pressed me to give more details. Now he seeks to slide out of the position by throwing the responsibility back upon the local authorities with their limited powers and restricted spheres of operation. This is not a problem which can be solved by any urban or district council.

Mr. MacEntee

Nobody prevented them from saying what they wanted. The local county councils made the survey themselves.

Mr. Davin

Is the Minister concluding because I want to speak before he concludes.

Mr. Cogan

The Minister will not conclude to-night.

Mr. Brennan

Deputy Cogan knows that as a member of the Carlow County Council.

Mr. MacEntee

I do not believe he knows anything about what goes on there.

Mr. Cogan

The Minister, apparently, does not know very much about what goes on in his own Government. I think that if this problem is going to be faced up to we must visualise a position in which more than one-fourth of the houses, which it is proposed to erect, will be erected in our rural areas.

The continued concentration of the population of this small agricultural country in four or five big cities is not a desirable development or one that should be encouraged. The Minister proceeds with a housing scheme, under which three-fourths of the houses are provided in urban areas and one-fourth in rural areas, and the Minister for Industry and Commerce will be carrying out his vast schemes of industrial development under which the main industries will be located in the larger centres of population and those engaged in industrial development will say that they are entitled to build their factories in the areas where the population is concentrated. Thus we have a position in which larger towns and cities will continue to grow and rural areas will continue to be depopulated simply because two or three Ministers cannot sit down together in a businesslike way to try to face up to this problem.

The Minister says that these 60,000 houses are required for workers. I wonder when farmers will come to be included in the category of workers? Is it seriously suggested that farmers do not work? In normal times a contribution of two-thirds of the cost of houses for workers was provided by the State. That is to be supplemented by a contribution from the transition development fund. But, while two-thirds of the cost of the worker's house is provided by the State, less than one seventh of tho cost of the small farmer's house is so provided. The grant that a small farmer would obtain for the purpose of providing a new house would be less than one-seventh of the total cost of erection. Since those vast sums of money provided for houses do not come out of the pockets of the Minister or his colleagues, but are collected from the community in general, surely it is the duty of the Government, if they have any sense of justice, if they have ever studied the Christian doctrine of distributive justice, to see that State moneys are distributed as equitably as possible over the population. A small farmer endeavouring to live on a holding of under £20 valuation is entitled to a greater contribution than one-seventh or one-eighth of the cost of erection when a worker, who may be, perhaps, a skilled worker, gets more than two-thirds of the cost of his house. There does not seem to be fair play or justice there.

The time has come when the State must face up to the necessity of dealing equitably between one type of worker and another. There should be justice and fair play for the workers who own a little property and who are, therefore, considered independent. Because they consider themselves independent, they are the best type of citizen in any State. Because of the contribution which they make to taxation they should be given justice and fair play. Therefore, I say that grants for the housing of that section of our rural population who are smallholders should be substantially increased. It is absolutely ridiculous, at the present cost of building materials, to offer a small farmer £40 for the reconstruction of nis house or £70 for the erection of a new building. That is one branch of the present Government's administration which I am afraid the Minister for Local Government 15 years hence will seriously and strongly condemn.

Since we are embarking on a big housing scheme, it is desirable that we should consider not only workers with families—who, of course, should be our first consideration—but also the young worker who proposes to marry. If such a worker makes application for a house he should receive favourable consideration. At the other end of the scale, there are the aged people, single people and people without dependents. For these there is practically no provision out of any State fund, notwithstanding the fact that they may have been contributing to the State through taxation all their lives. It will be agreed that such people have very little claim on houses that become vacant. The worker with a family gets first preference. As a matter of fact, single people are very frequently dispossessed of workers' houses, particularly in rural areas, and possibly that can be justified on the ground that these houses have adequate accommodation for a family and should not be occupied by one or two persons without dependents. Some type of housing scheme should be inaugurated to provide for aged people and single people who are not qualified to obtain the type of houses erected for workers families.

There is one aspect of the housing question which ought to be strongly stressed in this House. We know that in the housing development which took place prior to the war quite a number of people made very big profits out of the construction and erection of houses. As this is a national work, for which public money is provided, we should see to it that there will be no profiteering either in the provision of materials or in the erection of the houses. Neither should we tolerate profiteering in the financing of housing schemes. It is gratifying to know that the Government has decided drastically to cut the rates of interest at which money will be provided for housing. I am one of those who maintain that they should be still more drastically cut. I have never been able to discover why the State should pay interest on money which the State requires for national development. That money should be interest-free to the community and, if it was interest-free, it would make possible the provision of houses for our workers at a reasonable rent without the imposition of heavy burdens upon the taxpaying community. But, for various reasons, which are too complex at the moment, the State has decided that certain sections of the community should be paid something by way of pension in respect of every national development scheme which is financed by the State. That is a position which cannot be justified and it is one which I am sure the Minister for Local Government 15 years hence will strongly condemn.

It is also proposed to embark on a big scheme of road reconstruction and development. The sharp turns will be taken off and roads will be widened so that the road hogs can speed at any rate they think proper, and if any rural ratepayer ventures to cross those magnificent roads he will get a quick passage into eternity. I am anxious to know what portion, if any, will local ratepayers be called upon to bear in respect of road development in the future. We know that mechanical transport will increase and multiply. We know there will be more and more motor traffic on the roads. We know that even the big transport monopoly will put more and more vehicles of every kind on the roads. We know also that in the pre-war years motorists, through road tax, licences and various other forms of taxation to which they were subjected, paid a sufficient contribution to the State to maintain the roads at that time. I am quite certain that the road tax collected by the local authorities and the petrol duty and licence fees on motor vehicles collected by the revenue department should be sufficient to reconstruct and maintain roads in the future and there is no case for going to the rural ratepayers for any contribution towards road upkeep or reconstruction.

The motorists will be able to bear the cost of road maintenance provided the taxation they pay is utilised for that purpose and is not diverted to other perhaps less desirable purposes. That is one aspect of road policy to which the Minister should devote his attention. The railway companies in the old days provided their permanent ways and all the roadways they required. Now the motorists are to a great extent taking the place of the railways and they are in a position to pay for any wear and tear, any damage which they do to the roads. They are paying sufficient at present by way of taxation and it is only necessary to utilise the money for that purpose. In that way, the local ratepayers should be left out of it. If the rural ratepayers have any money to spare they can spend it upon the cul-de-sac roads and the by-roads which are in such a bad state of repair.

I think the Minister was rather unwise in suggesting that I am not very familiar with the administration of the county council of which I happen to be a member. I have a very intimate knowledge of how local administration is carried on, not only in the county in which I am a representative on the county council, but also in the county which I represent in this House. I hold very strongly that unless a complete change is made in the system of management of local affairs, local administration will tend to become more expensive and more inefficient. I think it was Deputy Corish who remarked that it was impossible for a county manager to attend to the affairs of all the public bodies in County Wexford. In Carlow and Kildare you have a county manager who is supposed to deal with the affairs of two county councils, of four urban councils and I do not know how many town commissioners. And he is not only expected to do that, but he is expected to run two head offices. We all know that a dog with two homes is hardly ever a useful animal. A county manager who tries to operate two county offices is bound to fail ignominiously. If the managerial system is to continue, we ought at least to confine a county manager to one county. The idea of a county manager dealing with the affairs of two counties is absolutely absurd and unworkable and the sooner it is discontinued the better.

Another striking feature of local administration is that county managers in recent years are tending to double their office staffs without consulting the county councils, which should have complete control over such matters. I think that is a step which even the Minister did not contemplate a county manager would take.

Surely, if, up to two or three years ago, a county office could be run with six, seven or eight officers, there is no justification for increasing the number to 15 or 16. That is the position which has occurred in Carlow. A big number of officials were brought in. They have had absolutely no experience. Such a big increase, taking place so suddenly, is undesirable and does not tend towards efficiency.

The Minister pats himself on the back on the fact that the number of births and marriages has increased and that the number of deaths has been reduced during the past year. I wonder what credit the Minister can claim for that position? Surely he does not think that the 10/- a week which is being provided for old-age pensioners has helped to prolong their lives?

Captain Giles

The family allowances.

Mr. Cogan

I hold that whatever increases may have taken place in the marriage and birth rates are due to the betterment of economic conditions during the past couple of years for a considerable section of the community. That betterment has taken place, not as a result of anything the Minister has done or left undone; it has occurred in spite of the Minister. If anybody is to be applauded for the improvement in our economic conditions during the past five or six years, that person is the late Adolf Hitler. I am sure the Minister would be generous enough to give credit where credit is due. Adolf Hitler, by bringing about a war situation throughout the world, did a good deal to boost up the economic standards of the people in this country. In addition to that he provided a good deal of employment for our people outside this country and our Government helped our workers to avail of that employment in Great Britain. Thus certain sections of our people have obtained a better standard of living but I think the Minister for Local Government should be the last person in the world to claim any credit for any improvement which has taken place in the standard of living of some of our people because, so far as it lay in his power, he did everything that was humanly or inhumanly possible to keep the standard of living down.

Mr. Davin

Deputy Burke seems to think that the Minister for Local Government is a marvellous man, a Heaven sent genius, but the Deputy ignores the fact that the Department over which the Minister presides is, in my opinion, heavily overloaded with political bosses. The Minister is in charge of a Department which has a much smaller staff than, for instance, the Department of Industry and Commerce but he has the privilege from the Government, through his extraordinary influence, of being assisted by two Parliamentary Secretaries. The Department of Industry and Commerce has a staff of 552 including the staff of the late Department of Supplies as compared with a staff of 482 for the Department of Local Government. If Deputy Burke looks into these figures and compares the size and responsibilities of one Department with the other, I think he will have to admit that the Minister's responsibilities are shared to a greater extent than those of any other Department owing to the fact that the Minister has two parliamentary Secre taries. The Minister himself, I am sure, will not deny that.

Mr. MacEntee

Certainly not.

Mr. Davin

The Minister, of course, is transparently enthusiastic and extraordinarily energetic. He displays those qualities in this House but much more outside the House on every occasion that he gets reasonable facilities for doing so, whether on top of a beer barrel or at a street corner in Cork or elsewhere. I welcome many of the statements made by the Minister in his exceptionally long opening speech and I only regret that I was not present to hear the whole of the Ministerial pronouncement. Many things have been reported to the House by the Minister in that statement which I am sure everybody anxious for the development of the State, the proper housing of the people and other improvements, will heartily welcome. The Minister deserves all the credit which he can claim in that respect for the responsibility which he shares with his Parliamentary Secretaries and the Government.

I welcome particularly the announcement made, by the Minister for Finance in the first instance and the Minister for Local Government afterwards, concerning the reduced rates of interest at which money is to be provided in future for local development work. I hope that we shall see a more democratic system of finance in this country in the near future. Although the Minister has, up to recently at any rate, been an admirer of the methods pursued by the Bank of Ireland and the Bank of England, I would hope that he will learn from the experience of every other nation, which has introduced a democratic system of finance that there is much more to be gained by operating a proper financial system than by pursuing the policy which has been in operation up to recently. It is only through such a system that he can bring the rates of interest down to a reasonable level. May I ask the Minister in connection with that very important aspect of Governmental work, whether, with the high cost of materials and with the reduced loan charges, it will be possible in future to say that not more than half the economic rent will represent interest on money? I think it is a scandalous state of affairs in a Christain country and in a democratic State that more than half the economic rents of houses built by local authorities, under this Government and the previous Government, represents interest on money paid to private moneylenders. There is something radically wrong with a financial system which allows that to be carried on. I should like to hear from the Minister whether there will be any change in future in connection with that very important matter.

When a local authority proceeds to build houses for working-class people, if they acquire and purchase land, provide materials and pay wages, it is an extraordinary state of affairs, to me at any rate—I may be dull in matters of this kind and I may have a funny out-look—that the rates of interest on money borrowed from private moneylenders should represent a higher figure than the cost of the land, wages and the materials put into the building. It has to be paid over a long period of years. I do not know whether it is possible but I would invite the Minister to give sympathetic consideration to the question of merging old loans that have been sanctioned for a long period of years and which provide us with some glaring examples, in my constituency at any rate, of the varying rents that are being charged by some local authorities for the same class of house. In the case of one very progressive urban council in my constituency so far as house building and any other form of activity within its authority is concerned—that is the Tullamore Urban Council—a large number of houses were built over a period of years. Inside a certain period they built 313 houses and the rents at present charged—mind you, in many cases for the same class of house with the same kind of accommodation— ranged from 2/3 to 2/6, 3/-, 3/6, 3/8 up to 6/11. That state of affairs cannot be allowed to continue. The same conditions exist in other parts of the constituency and I am sure in many other parts of the country. Would it be possible for the Minister and the Government to redeem all these old loans and have them merged at a standard rate of interest at a rate similar to that recently announced by the Government? If that were done these rents could be standardised. You would, thereby, be removing this cause for jealousy as well as a good deal of the contention that appears to be prevalent in some of these areas. That is due to the fact that different rents are being charged for the same class of house. I am putting this matter to the Minister quite sincerely. It deserves his early and sympathetic consideration.

Mr. MacEntee

Surely the Deputy could make his case more effectively to the Minister for Finance.

Mr. Davin

I think I am speaking to a Minister who understands the housing programme, with all its implications, much better than the Minister for Finance. I should like to see the Minister use his all powerful and magnetic influence with tile Minister for Finance in regard to this. The Minister himself was Minister for Finance, and, naturally, by reason of his years of experience knows more about the Department of Finance than the present Minister who has been there only a few months.

Mr. MacEntee

That is a bad line of approach anyhow.

Mr. Davin

I think it is an intelligent approach. Surely the Minister would contradict me if I were to say that he had not as much knowledge of the Department of Finance as the present Minister who has been there only for comparatively short period. In saying that, I do not mean any disrespect to the Minister for Finance. I am sure that he will learn as he goes along and will probably know more about finance when he has been as long in the Department as the Minister for Local Government was, and he learned a good deal about it before he left that Department. However, I am putting this suggestion to the Minister for his favourable consideration.

I have stated what the position is in the town of Tullamore. I know that the same position exists in other parts of my constituency. I am well aware that these varying rents that I have quoted cannot be related to realities or commonsense. In the town of Tullamore, for instance, you have a rent of 2/3 on 30 houses, with the recent rate increase of 7d., although these houses were built 43 years ago. At the same time you have 20 houses built by the same authority in the year 1937 with the same rent of 2/3, and the same rate increase. The houses built in 1937 cost a good deal more than the 30 houses that were built 43 years ago. I would ask the Minister to direct his inspectors, when visiting these areas, to report to him how these rents and rate increases on houses can be related to commonsense or to Government policy. Deputy Flanagan, who was fired out of the House on a recent occasion, endeavoured to raise this question of the recent rate increase on houses in my constituency, particularly in the Tullamore area. The Minister on that occasion, by his answer, gave the Deputy the impression that he had no authority to interfere in cases of the kind, although he must know that in other areas in the same constituency— under urban councils or town commissioners—there was no increase of rent as a result of an increase in the rates.

The Minister also gave the impression—he will correct me on this if I am wrong—that there was a statutory obligation on a local authority to increase rents in an area where the rates were increased. I challenge the Minister on that statement, because I know of other areas where the rent was not increased as a result of a rate increase. I think there is a discretion given to a local authority to say whether the rents of houses should be increased when the rates are increased. I can give the Minister the names of other local authorities that did not follow the bad example of this county manager in recently increasing the rates upon the large number of 313 houses built by the Tullamore Urban Council, the houses in some cases being occupied by persons who are in receipt of the miserable allowance of 8/- a week home assistance. The Minister may be able to explain the extraordinary provision that prevails there, where an increased rate of 7d. per week was put on houses carrying a rent of 6/11 per week and at that same time putting this increased rate of 7d. per week on houses carrying a rent of 2/3 per week-houses that were built 43 years ago. If that decision was given by one of the patients in one of the padded cells in Portlaoighise Mental Hospital one might understand it. Surely nobody can understand such a decision being given by any responsible official, or that any Minister would stand over a policy of that kind.

Mr. Allen

Is the Deputy a member of the local rating authority?

Mr. Davin

No, and I am not anxious to be.

Mr. Allen

I just asked the question.

Mr. Davin

When the Deputy is speaking he can tell me why it is that the rates are increased by one local authority and not by another.

Mr. Allen

I was just wondering at the Deputy's colossal ignorance.

Mr. Davin

I certainly plead ignorance as to why one local authority should be obliged to increase the rates while another is not.

Mr. Allen

If the Deputy knew anything about local administration he would not make such a statement.

Mr. Davin

Will the Deputy tell me why it is that one local authority, according to the Minister, is obliged to do that by law, while another local authority does not do it? The Deputy cannot be held responsible for policy or administration, although he may be graduating for Ministerial position by exposing the fact that he has more intelligence than the Minister himself. It is quite obvious that what the Deputy has said is quite different from what the Minister said to my colleague, Deputy Flanagan, a couple of weeks ago.

I am anxious that the Minister, when replying, would give a little more information about the conferences which he has been in the habit of holding with the county managers. I want to say, so that the Minister may not misunderstand, that I entirely agree with him in having these periodical conferences with the county managers, not for the purpose of interfering with the administration of the county managers so far as policy is concerned, but with the object of giving them information on detailed matters of administration, thereby saving valuable time and a lot of unnecessary correspondence between the local authority and the Custom House. These conferences could serve a useful purpose of that kind. I ask the Minister to state emphatically, if I would be correct in saying that he lectures the county managers on matters of policy. Would I be correct in saying that, at a recent meeting with the county managers, he told them that they were not to be sending up resolutions or proposals that might cause embarrassment from a policy point of view? Would it be correct, for instance, to say that he discouraged them from sending up resolutions passed by county councils, in some cases unanimously, recommending increased rates of remuneration for the employees of local authorities?

Mr. MacEntee

That would be quite correct. The managers are responsible for fixing the remuneration of their officers, and they must carry that responsibility.

Mr. Davin

It is quite true to say then that the Minister did discourage them from sending up resolutions passed by local authorities——

Mr. MacEntee

Yes.

Mr. Davin

——on matters of that kind, although the Minister and everybody sitting on the Government benches say that the members of a local authority have complete control of financial matters. Now, the cat is out of the bag, and I hope that we will have no more contradictions or confused statements on this matter, either in the House or in the country. If the members of a local authority, elected by the ratepayers, are supposed to have complete control over financial matters, they, and not you, are the people who are competent to decide the rates of wages, particularly the rates of wages which should be paid to their employees.

I compliment the Minister on being so candid in admitting that he has adopted a dictatorial attitude in matters of this kind and that local authorities have not the powers he alleged they had when speaking in the country. We know where we are in these matters now and local authorities will know what they are intended to do in the future. It is a fairly serious state of affairs.

In view of the conflicting answers given by the Minister to a number of questions put by me and some of my colleagues, I should like if he would state the real relationship of the Ministry and the local authorities on all aspects of the housing question. I shall not go over the ground covered by other Deputies. I am prepared to say that this Government did much more than the last Government in regard to housing and made considerable headway in endeavouring to meet the needs of the people.

Mr. O'Leary

They had to fulfil their promise.

Mr. Davin

I am giving them the share of credit to which they are entitled as against their predecessors. I have asked the Minister on a number of occasions if he would use his good offices in seeing that housing schemes presented by the local authority and sanctioned by the Department in certain areas in my constituency are properly completed. On one occasion, the Minister told me, to my amazement, that he had no power to intervene. He said that he had no power in the matter when I asked him to send down one of his inspectors for the purpose of finding out whether the allegations regarding the condition of the houses were correct or otherwise. I told the people concerned in a particular case that I would not get up in the House and give details of the complaints they made to me and to my colleagues during the past six months, I was so satisfied the complaints were justified that I said I would ask the Minister to send down one of his medical or engineering inspectors to look at the houses and report back. A short time after the Minister told me that he had no power to intervene, an inspector arrived in the area and I assume that the Minister received a report from him regarding the allegations concerning the Clara housing scheme and the failure of the local authority, the clerk of works or the contractor to complete the scheme according to the original plans. Serious complaints were made regarding this scheme. I am aware that an inspector went down and I should like to hear from the Minister what action he proposes to take to secure that occupiers of those 100 odd houses will be given the facilities they were promised under the original plan. I always understood until recently that a contractor carrying out a housing scheme for a local authority could not get paid in full until a certificate was given by the architect or clerk of works, on his behalf, that the scheme had been completed according to plan. In this case, it is admitted that the scheme was not completed according to plan and the cost of completing it will be £13,000 more. Who is going to pay that, I do not know. The contractor, according to my information, has got away with the full amount of the contract and I think that that is entirely wrong.

Mr. Lydon

Was a certificate issued?

Mr. Davin

I understand it was.

Mr. Lydon

By the local engineer?

Mr. Davin

The architect is supposed to be responsible for the completion of the scheme, but he employs a clerk of works and the clerk of works has to be approved by the Minister. If that is so, the Minister has some responsibility for seeing that the scheme is completed according to plan and that the clerk of works earns his salary and carries out his duties. The Minister gave me a confusing reply. I thank him for sending down an inspector subsequent to his saying that he had no responsibility. If he has not the opportunity when replying to this debate to deal with the matter, I hope he will let me know the result of the inspector's visit and what recommendation, if any, has been made.

I asked the Minister on more than one occasion what responsibility he had for the letting of houses built by local authorities or cottages built by county councils in rural areas. He informed me that he had no responsibility in matters of this kind. I am reliably informed by a responsible official of a local authority outside my area that the Minister has to be furnished with information regarding the letting of labourers' cottages, especially in cases where single persons are recommended for the tenancy of those cottages. In my area, an unmarried woman was given the tenancy of a labourer's cottage, and married men with large families were turned down. Will the Minister say definitely if he has any responsibility in these matters? If he has, I hope he will exercise it, especially in cases where labourers' cottages are being given to single people of either sex in preference to married men with families. If there is an order of priority in the Department regarding the letting of labourers' cottages, I shall be glad to learn from the Minister what it is. If there is no order of priority, I suggest to the Minister that, with his long experience, he should consider the advisability of framing a scheme for the information of local authorities and thereby preventing those authorities, or the county managers, from doing something which might not be in accordance with Ministerial policy. The first people to be given labourers' cottages in an urban or rural area should be married men with families who are living in condemned houses. There is no sense in a local authority, or whoever is responsible, giving a labourer's cottage to an unmarried lady when several men with families have been looking for these houses for years. In one case to which I drew the Minister's attention he took action and I thank him for his assistance. A glaring injustice was obviated in that case by his using his good offices with the local authority concerned.

I said at the outset that this Department was overloaded with political bosses. I suspect—though I cannot prove it—that many of the complaints made by members of local authorities regarding delay in sanctioning proposals sent to the Custom House are due to the interference—interference very often means inefficiency—of the political bosses rather than the Departmental heads. I know a number of cases in my area in which members of local authorities had to wait for months before they heard a word from the Custom House. If you have a Minister, with two Parliamentary Secretaries assisting him, there is something radically wrong when you have such delays. I absolve the officials from responsibility for these delays. You have three political heads and I am pretty certain that the political heads of that Department have to see too many matters of detail. They take a good deal of time to consider these matters and it causes consequential inefficiency. The local authority is being blamed in many cases for the delay in carrying out schemes which are really held up by the Minister and his assistants in the Custom House. On a recent occasion I had the opportunity to meet a large number of members of local authorities in my area, including the members of every Party. I was accompanied by another Deputy and it was quite an accidental meeting, not prearranged; but the principal subject of discussion there, or subject of attack on us, was as to what we could do to remove the dead wood in the Custom House, or whoever was responsible for the holding up of proposals for the carrying out of sewerage and waterworks schemes, the sanctioning of loans for the erection of labourers' cottages and numerous other such matters. I ask the Minister to explain to the House the average period taken by himself and the responsible officers in the Custom House to consider proposals for the carrying out of sewerage and waterworks schemes, applications for loans for the repair of labourers' cottages, and so on. Surely, they should go direct to the person who has authority to give a decision, and decisions on matters of that kind, such as on applications for loans for repair of labourers' cottages, could be settled inside a month and should not take five or six months before receiving sanction.

I am not raising these matters now in any contentious spirit or trying to drive the Minister into any provocative line in replying to these matters, but if he examines the files in the Custom House—from my area, at any rate—he will find there has been undue delay in dealing with some of these applications. I accuse the political heads and charge them with responsibility, and not the heads of the Departments concerned, because the accusations in regard to delay are worse now than they were four or five years ago, when there was only one Minister and one Parliamentary Secretary in charge.

I want also, though I suppose it is useless to do it, to protest again briefly against the Ministerial edict which prevents Deputies from making representations to the deciding officers in the Custom House in support of applications for old age pensions. I think there are no grounds whatever for such a decision. Since I became a member of this House over 24 years ago, I never held up a Minister or a head of a Department in connection with a matter of this kind before I sent in a written representation in respect of the application. I have always regarded it as my duty to make such a written representation and, if I did not get a reply inside a reasonable period, would send to the Minister or the Secretary of the Department or the head of the section the names and addresses of the pensions applicants concerning whom I had made representations and ask him to see me at a suitable date for a short time for the purpose of helping him to dispose of those applications. There is nothing radically wrong in a procedure of that kind. I do not think that in those 24 years I ever held up a Minister around a corridor and asked him to deal with a pension application, as it was perfectly obvious that no Minister could carry the details of a particular application in his head.

Is it a fact that Fianna Fáil Deputies are privileged in connection with the carrying out of that order? Is it the position—I am sure it is— that Fianna Fáil Deputies can go around the corner and see the Parliamentary Secretary concerned and make representations in respect of applicants, whereas Deputies on this side of the House are denied that privilege? Does the Taoiseach know that, as, if he does, I want him to relate it to what he has said in regard to the rights of Deputies.

Mr. MacEntee

The statement is completely false.

Mr. Davin

The statement is false? I had a peculiar experience inside the last two years. A certain letter was put into my envelope in connection with a pension application—a letter intended for a Fianna Fáil Deputy— and what happened?

Mr. MacEntee

That has not been done since the circular was issued.

Mr. Davin

I could not swear it was since then, to be quite frank, but I know the Minister will give me the benefit of the doubt.

Mr. MacEntee

No, I will not.

Mr. Davin

I sent the document I got to the pension applicant concerned and the next thing I heard was that the applicant never wrote to Deputy So-and-so of the Fianna Fáil Party.

Mr. Blowick

That is quite common.

Mr. Killilea

We have all had the same experience.

Mr. Davin

That may be so. As I do not happen to know the pension applicant personally in that case, I cannot contradict that, but it was a peculiar discovery. At any rate, if Fianna Fáil Deputies are getting privileges in representations of this kind that are denied to Deputies on this side of the House, it is a very unfair system of administration. There is nothing radically wrong in allowing Deputies, who undertake not to take up too much of a departmental official's time, to make representations about cases which they know more about than the official. I know from long experience that the investigation officers— and every Deputy knows it—go too far in discharging their duties, to the disadvantage and detriment of the applicant. I do not know what kind of secret instructions those investigation officers have, but in any case they are going too far. I am sure it is the view of every Deputy that the miserable pension of 10/- a week should be given to those who are entitled to it by age and that all these curious questions and investigations carried on by these persons should cease.

Mr. MacEntee

We have no responsibility for the investigation officers.

Mr. Davin

The Minister has.

Mr. MacEntee

I have none whatever.

Mr. Davin

The Minister gives the decision for the payment of a pension, based on the confidential report of the investigation officer, and I know one unfortunate applicant——

Mr. MacEntee

On a point of order——

Mr. Davin

Is it a point of order?

An Ceann Comhairle

That is for the Chair to judge.

Mr. Davin

Immediately you say so, I bow to your ruling, but I am not taking the Minister as the authority.

Mr. MacEntee

The investigation officers are officers of the Revenue Commissioners. They get their instructions from the Revehue Commissioners to carry out their duties in accordance with the law. I have no responsibility for the activities of investigation officers.

Mr. Davin

I know perfectly well that they are the servants of the Revenue Department, but their confidential reports are sent to the Custom House.

Mr. MacEntee

No.

An Ceann Comhairle

There is a Vote, No. 7, for old age pensions, and the Deputy might make his point on that.

Mr. Davin

I am relating this to the Minister's edict preventing Deputies from pleading before the deciding officers.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Local Government and Public Health (Mr. Childers)

There is no such edict.

Mr. Davin

There is, a Hitlerised one, and carried out, so far as the deciding officers are concerned, in a Hitlerised fashion.

Mr. Childers

That is an entirely incorrect statement.

Mr. Davin

Surely the Parliamentary Secretary is still wide awake?

Mr. Childers

The Deputy misunderstands the position.

Mr. Davin

Is there not a circular issued by the Minister for Local Government, preventing Deputies from visiting deciding officers or departmental officials in the Custom House, to advance arguments in support of pension applications?

Mr. MacEntee

That is not so, and the Deputy quite obviously has not read the circular. One does not worry about these things in the case of Deputy Davin, as he seldom makes a statement that is quite correct. The position in that regard is, quite simply, that no person is allowed to see an appeals officer unless he is in a position to say that he has definite personal information not in the possession of the appeals officer and in writing before. He is allowed to go before the appeals officer when the case is reached, if he has any special knowledge about the matter not already disclosed in writing. He will be informed when the appeals officer is prepared to deal with that particular case and then, if his assistance will be of value to the applicant, he will be allowed to see the officer.

Mr. Davin

I am very much obliged to the Minister for modifying the order.

Mr. MacEntee

The order has not been modified.

Mr. Davin

I understand the wording of it as well as the Minister.

Mr. MacEntee

The order has not been modified.

Mr. Davin

The order has been modified by the statement the Minister made.

Mr. Childers

I challenge the Deputy to produce that circular. The position is exactly as stated by the Minister.

Mr. Davin

We have had a policy announced in connection with the improvement of the roads and I plead with the Minister for a standardised system of maintenance for trunk and main roads. That standardised system of maintenance cannot be brought about without a more centralised system of control, whereby some instructions would be sent to county surveyors and engineers in every area in which there are trunk roads as to how they are to be maintained. The Minister probably knows more about the position than I do. He travels much more than I do and is aware that there is a varying system of maintenance of trunk and main roads. In some counties there are good roads while in others, say, portion of the road from Dublin to Cork, they are comparatively bad. I could mention counties where there is a good system of road maintenance and, as against that, there are portions leading from one county to another to which I invite the Minister's attention, particularly in view of the fact that the cost of road maintenance is going to be increased.

I hope my appeal to him will not fall on deaf ears when I ask him to consider more sympathetically than in the past the question of making provision for the payment of road workers' wages weekly. I know that it has been mentioned by Deputies in different Parties from time to time. If the best and the worst employers are obliged to pay their workers weekly, whether engaged in agriculture or in industry, a good case cannot be made for a State Department or for local authorities not doing so. It is necessary for those who have to live on low wages to get them weekly. Every Deputy knows that casual workers can get very little credit from local shopkeepers. It is desirable that they should have cash weekly, not only to enable them to pay the rent but to pay for essential commodities.

A proposal of this kind was put up to the Minister—and I think to his predecessor—by local authorities. Recently I read the ridiculous statement made by one county manager, to the effect that it would cost an additional £3,000 if road workers were to be paid wages amounting to some £700 weekly instead of fortnightly. As one with almost 40 years' clerical experience, I say that that is a most ridiculous statement. I work with a concern which employs several hundred workers. They work by day and by night on week-days and on Sundays. Sometimes there is overtime or they may work time and a half and at other times time and a quarter. They have to be paid weekly. That is the reason why I say that it is ridiculous for anybody to suggest that it would cost £3,000 yearly if wages amounting to £700 had to be paid weekly. I could get a junior clerk with a couple of years' experience for £200 a year who would make up a pay-sheet for road workers in Leix-Offaly in about quarter of the time that it would take him to make out a pay-sheet for twice as many railway workers. Does the Minister not admit that road workers as well as those who work for farmers or in a local factory are entitled to get their wages weekly?

I have had complaints from the wives of these men; I am sure other Deputies have had similar complaints. If we are living in anything like modern times, and if we can claim that local authorities are conducting their affairs on a business like basis, they should be able to provide a clerk for two counties like my constituency at a maximum cost of £300 a year, who would make out pay-sheets to enable workers to be paid weekly. If it cost £300 in my constituency it would only mean a ¼d. in the £ on the rates. Surely it would be worth paying a ¼d. in the £ to achieve such a desirable object. I appeal to the Minister to consider the matter on the merits and to follow the good example set by other employers.

Mr. Brennan

Having listened to this debate, it is fair to assume that the kernel of what was said, both from the Government and the Opposition Benches, concerns housing. I wish to congratulate the Minister on the amount of money he has provided in the Estimate for housing. As one who has a practical knowledge of the housing position I fail to see why Deputies spent so much time dealing with it. The Minister has provided a certain amount of money for housing, and he gave figures indicating the number of houses that will be provided by that money. He even went so far as to give the approximate number of houses to be erected both in county boroughs, urban districts and rural areas. Deputies made efforts to bring before the Minister the absolute necessity of housing in their areas. I do not understand why they did not leave the matter in the hands of the Minister, and congratulate him on having provided the money for such essential work. The essentials in the matter of getting the work which he has in mind carried out are, first, action by the county councils and, secondly, the availability of the materials necessary.

It has been suggested that the Minister is making provision for only a certain number of houses—13,000 or 17,000 —in rural areas. If the Deputy who made that suggestion is a member of a local authority and if he is attending to his duties and listening to the circulars sent to the local authorities from time to time by the Department read at council meetings, he should have known, and, I am sure, does know, that the Department have asked these councils to furnish them with statistics of the number of dwellings necessary in their areas, and, not alone that, but statistics in relation to essential works, such as sanitation, sewerage and water schemes which, in the opinion of these bodies, should have priority in any scheme.

That Deputy, I believe, knew it was a matter for his own council to supply the Department with the necessary statistics as to the number of houses required; but, merely to score a point against the Minister, he introduced this matter in an attempt to be jocosely sarcastic. Deputies, I am sure, will agree with me that we may leave that Deputy to the Minister who will be quite capable of dealing with him in regard to these matters.

I should like to ask whether, apart altogether from the provision of housing by local authorities, any provision has been or will be made whereby the grants to private builders will be augmented by moneys from the transition development fund. The private builder, according to the returns with which we are supplied from time to time, has been responsible for upwards of 50 per cent. of housing activities, and I suggest that if a certain proportion of this fund has not already been set aside for the private builder, some of the moneys available in that fund should be devoted to augmenting the grants available for private building.

Reference has also been made to the delay in carrying out building, but, as I have said, that is one of the matters over which the Minister has no control. Timber for building is at the moment a very scarce commodity. The foreign timber which has come in small quantities is controlled and is issued by the Minister for Industry and Commerce only on the basis of its being used for a particular purpose. While I congratulate the Minister on the amount of money he has provided and is providing for housing, I want to suggest that, in some form or other— through the Minister for Industry and Commerce—he should control timber of a commercial type which has been felled in this country and which can be used, and is being used, as rough timber in building construction, in order to ensure that, in the rural, urban and borough areas, the houses which he has in view will eventually be built and to ensure that such timber will not be allocated to any building work, except some building work of an industrial nature which he considers essential.

Deputy Davin referred to the building of houses in his area and said that he hoped that the Minister would take steps to see that the abnormal profits which building contractors secured from the building of cottages would not be secured in future.

Mr. Davin

I said no such thing.

Mr. Brennan

You did.

Mr. Davin

I talked about the profits of the private moneylender.

Mr. McAuliffe

Not about the contractors. He never mentioned contractors.

Mr. MacEntee

The contractors have votes in Deputy Davin's constituency.

Mr. Brennan

If I am wrong, I apologise, but I do not think I am. I have Deputy Allen to back me up.

Mr. Davin

He is looking for a Parliamentary Secretary's job.

Mr. Brennan

I think the Deputy did say it.

Mr. MacEntee

That is a very fitting remark from Deputy Davin.

Mr. Davin

I did not say it.

Mr. Brennan

From practical experience in building in pre-war days and as it is now, I can assure Deputy Davin and the House that there were none of these abnormal profits. There were no abnormal profits at all. Really to my mind what is responsible for the high housing costs to-day, and even in the period pre-war, is the high rate of wages and the low output for the wages that are paid; and that is something which Deputy Davin and his Party always conveniently refrain from making any reference to when talking of housing costs.

Mr. Davin

36/- a week.

Mr. McAuliffe

And 24/- a week.

Mr. Brennan

Unskilled labour does not build a house.

Mr. Davin

You are on very shaky ground now.

Mr. Brennan

The wages paid to unskilled labour are a very small item in the total housing costs. The sooner the Labour Party, who talk so much about trade unionism and who have quoted from time to time in this House the Pope's Encyclicals as to an honest day's pay for an honest day's work, realise that there is an other side to it—namely, an honest day's work for an honest day's pay—the better it will be for them and everyone else. Now, when I use the word "honest" I do not wish to be misinterpreted. I believe that the average worker in this country is an honest man, be he either skilled or unskilled. But he seems to have got into a kind of groove where he no longer takes any personal pride in his own output—pride in the fact that he can turn out a certain amount of work on any given day. Twenty or 25 years ago when a man finished work at 5.30 or 6 o'clock in the evening he would look at it with pride and say: "Have I turned out so much work? My boss did not want me to turn out so much work. but I did turn it out simply and solely because, if I had not turned it out, I should not have felt that I was a good man; in other words, I take pride in my work and pride in the fact that I am a good man." The sooner the Labour Party in this House reverts to that ideal and insists upon a reasonable output, the sooner the country will be in a position to reduce building costs generally. Now, as I have already said, the 36/- a week man costs very little in the total price of a house. It is the man who is earning from £4 10s. to £5 5s. per week who brings up the cost of housing.

Mr. McAuliffe

There are very few of those.

Mr. Brennan

Those are the men who put up the cost of houses.

Mr. Davin

Where, where, where?

Mr. Brennan

Everywhere.

Mr. Davin

I am afraid you know very little about it.

Mr. Brennan

I know all about it on Saturday night when I have got to pay out.

Mr. Davin

You never said anything about that to the workers in your constituency when you had the opportunity.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order, please.

Mr. Brennan

What have I got to do with the workers except to pay them on Saturday night? I am a good friend of the workers and I have probably a good deal more in common with the workers than Deputy Davin has.

Mr. Davin

I doubt it very much

Mr. Brennan

I pay them anyhow, and pay them well, for the work they do.

Mr. Davin

I pay them too.

Mr. Brennan

I think that is all I have to say on the housing question. I hope the Minister will not be influenced by the suggestion which was thrown out here by Deputy Corish. Deputy Corish suggested to the Minister that in order to overcome the present housing shortage he should introduce pre-fabricated types of houses here. I do not profess to know anything about these houses; but I think at the same time I am safe in saying that I know a little more about them than Deputy Corish does. I suggest to the Minister that he should pay no attention to such a suggestion. The Minister and his Department are well aware of the cost to local bodies every year for the upkeep of houses in the rural areas. Even houses built pre-1914, with stone walls 18 inches thick, deteriorate because of their isolated situation and because of their complete exposure to all types of weather and the ordinary wear and tear of family life. What would the position be in a few years' time if we were to go in now for these new fangled pre-fabricated houses? What would be the position if the local authorities were to introduce those houses for the workers in the rural areas? I think it would be money thrown away. I am sure the Minister does nbt require any advice from me on such a matter as this. I am sure he will do everything he possibly can to provide houses and I am sure he will take Deputy Corish's suggestion merely for what it is worth.

There is just one other matter in regard to the question of roads. The Minister for Finance is to be congratulated on the provision he has made to enable the essential repairs and the upkeep of roads generally to be carried out this year. Roads have deteriorated considerably due to the non-availability of tar, etc. during the emergency period. At the present moment it is a pleasure to make the journey through the two or three counties through which I have to travel from time to time and to see so many men engaged on the roads; and to know at the same time that the roads are now being re-surfaced to carry the traffic which they will be called upon to carry in the not too distant future. Here, I want to mention just one particular matter; I am sorry to say that this particular matter is one which will hit Deputy Davin again. I would suggest to the Minister that he should examine into this question as to the method adopted for the upkeep of the roads and which was introduced here some 20 years ago. I refer to emplovment by direct labour. As a member of a county council and as a ratepayer, I do not believe that the ratepayers, in County Wicklow at any rate, receive a proper return for the money expended in wages in respect of the upkeep of the roads. I suggest to the Minister that the system should be reviewed. I have seen men engaged in taking off three inches of grass from the side of a water table and throwing it back on the ditch. I maintain that that could be allowed to stay there for four years without interfering with the traffic on the road and that at the end of four years the avarage road worker that is handy with a shovel could take four years' growth off. I know that the money is allocated for the main roads, but I suggest the money saved by allowing the grass to remain there for four years could be expended on the county roads.

Mr. Davin

You want grass roads?

Mr. Brennan

The Deputy does not know what I am talking about.

Mr. Davin

I know. It is good Fianna Fáil stuff.

Mr. Brennan

The Deputy cannot visualise what I am talking about. I have been sufficiently explanatory. I suggest that the whole system of direct labour should be considered. I want to say that I am not blaming the workers on the road but I would throw the blame on those who are responsible for looking after the roads.

Mr. McAuliffe

Who are they?

Mr. Davin

The Minister.

Mr. Brennan

Is it necessary for me to answer the question?

Mr. McAuliffe

I do not think you can answer it.

Mr. Brennan

Put a question to me that needs an answer. That hardly needs one.

Mr. McAuliffe

I think it does.

Mr. Brennan

Hospitalisation schemes have been carried out in other counties but such a scheme has not yet materialised in County Wicklow. Eight or nine years ago, representatives from the Hospitals Trust visited County Wicklow and, I suppose, inquired into the needs of the county in the matter of hospitalisation and, presumably, made a report. My friend, Deputy Allen, I think, was one of the representatives. With the exception of the provision of a sanatorium at Rathdrum, no hospitalisation scheme has been carried out in County Wicklow. Sanction has been received from the Department for hospitals in certain areas and for additional work to be carried out to the existing hospital at Baltinglass. Provision has also been made for a temporary fever hospital in the town of Wicklow. That was absolutely essential in view of the fact that during 1945 and part of 1944 there was a very serious outbreak of fever in the town of Wicklow. But, while sanction has been obtained for these purposes, there does not seem to be any attempt to start the constructional work. If the Minister's Department is responsible for holding up the necessary works in Baltinglass or the proposed temporary fever hospital in the town of Wicklow, I would ask him to speed up the sanction of plans, etc., for these particular hospitals.

Captain Giles

This is an Estimate on which there should be very little political temper but, unfortunately, the Minister in charge of the Department brought in his Estimate last night in a very bad spirit. Although I never had much respect for any Minister of the present Government, having listened to the Minister last night, I take off my hat to his predecessor, Mr. Seán T. O'Kelly, now President of Ireland, for the manner in which he always brought in his Estimate. He brought it in like a gentleman. He did get in political scoring, but he did it in a decent manner. The Minister in introducing the Estimate last night behaved, not like a gentleman, but more like an upstart. It was really a disgrace. I hope he will take a leaf out of his predecessor's book and begin to conduct himself in a proper spirit.

This Estimate is one which concerns all the people, on every side of the House, and all over the country. It should not be treated as a political matter. His attack on his predecessor in office, Deputy Mulcahy, was not very becoming. His attempt to make a comparison between 1922 and 1932 and 1932 and 1946 was totally unfair because he ought to realise that the previous Administration was the first Government we had in 700 years and that it had two tasks to perform—to fight with one hand and to build with another— and that it had not four years of peace during all that time. The Minister ought to realise that, up to 1927, his own Party was sulking in the wilderness and they did nothing to help in the building up of this House. The Cosgrave Party had to take it all in hand and they had a hard job. They did it very well. It is all very well to say that they did little or nothing, but they spent over £30,000,000 repairing roads, bridges and houses which were knocked down by the very men whom the present Minister represents.

An Ceann Comhairle

The civil war is out of bounds.

Captain Giles

It was not last night.

An Ceann Comhairle

There was no reference last night to any period before 1931.

Mr. Cafferky

The Minister referred to the administration of Deputy Mulcahy when he was Minister for Local Government.

An Ceann Comhairle

I have said the civil war is out of bounds. It was not mentioned last night and it will not be discussed to-night.

Mr. Keating

I think the Minister mentioned the Blueshirts last night.

Mr. Davin

Good man, John.

Captain Giles

As regards the previous Administration, when they lost the mandate of the people, they walked out and they left a nice warm seat for the Minister. They did not begrudge it to him. They went out in a normal, decent way and they should have due respect from the nation. I hope we have no more recriminations or references to the past. The principal concern in the country to-day is housing. Housing is a crying need, not alone in the country areas, but in the villages and towns. We want houses at the rate of tens of thousands. The present position is not a happy one. There is too much dilly-dallying and not sufficient progress. We hear a lot about planning, but nothing definite is achieved. I believe you will not see a cottage built in this country inside two years. In my county we have had a scheme for the erection of 350 cottages prepared for the last three or four years. We advertised for the erection of 65 cottages. We got a tender and accepted it, but within a week or two the contractor threw up the job because he had not sufficient materials with which to build the cottages.

We have made some progress in Meath. Very few counties can say that they advertised for tenders for the erection of cottages. What help will the Minister give us in connection with our building programme in Meath? In connection with the scheme for 350 cottages, some delay has been caused and we require the services of an arbitrator, but we cannot get one. If we had one we would be able to go ahead with the erection of the 350 cottages. At least we could give the plots to the labourers and they would be able to till them. We can do nothing until we have the arbitrator. The scheme is being held up in the Department.

As regards town planning, I agree that is very necessary but the position is that we have planning in both town and country and I suggest it is unfair to have country planning introduced at this stage. I can see many snags in my own county. There is no reason for country planning until the town planning schemes have been carried out. Farmers want to build houses in their own way and I know of cases where, when the farmers had the foundations almost laid, they were told to stop the work and that they had no authority to go ahead with it. They were informed that the road might be changed to another place. When one man asked when would the road be changed, he was informed that it might not be for perhaps 50 years. There was one farmer prepared to do his work in his own way on a road which I believe will never be changed. He was stopped. He was a man prepared to erect a house for £500 or £600. The work is held up because we have country planning. That is all damned rot and I ask the Minister to drop it for the moment. Town planning is all right. We do not want to have our towns lopsided; we want them built to a concerted plan. But country planning should not be allowed to hold up progressive farmers.

As regards the road scheme, I am not satisfied with the position in Meath. The engineers have planned new secret highways for the future and we in the county council cannot get a word as to the cost. We do not know what the engineers are planning or where the roads are to run. The whole thing is being done in perfect secrecy. At the same time it is public knowledge that most of the roads will run across the whole country and I heard that one road will take in three churchyards, one Catholic church and two schools; it will not go around them; it will run right through and those buildings must be moved. We have more Adolf Hitlers now than in the past. He tried the same thing in Europe and see where it left him.

We do not want any of these highways. We want ordinary, decent roads for the plain people. The roads in this country are not so bad at all. They are as good as any that are to be found in Europe. We do not want vast highways that will cost a colossal amount. They will be merely pleasure grounds for motorists and will not be much use for the men with five or ten acres or the man with a cabbage garden. Let us take a commonsense view and endeavour to make the roads we have as safe as possible. The motorists can go over them at a reasonable speed. This country is too small for vast highways. If you start making these new roads you will have practically no land left.

Deputy Brennan spoke about road workers and I will more or less support what he said because there is a good deal in it. So far as County Meath is concerned I am satisfied we are not getting a fair return from the workers on the roads. I think there should be some investigation as to why we should not have more contract labour. Direct labour is definitely costly and we have not the proper supervision. I see it in my own county, although I am not one who endeavours to pry into other people's business. A man working for a farmer does three times as much work as a man working for the county council on the public roads.

The present road system is a waste of public money. Fifty per cent. of the men on the roads are not fit to work at all. They are laggards who get in by hook or crook. Some of them are 72 years of age and you can see them hopping along with their shovels. They do not give a fair return to the ratepayers and there should be a clean up. Pay a man a decent wage by all means, but let him do a decent day's work. There are vast numbers of men who do not give a fair return. That is the snag that the ratepayers want cleared up and I hope the Minister will do it. I hate to say these things, but the people want me to say them. I am satisfied there is a lot of slacking going on. There are not enough flying visits from the engineers. They will go round on occasions, but their cars are known. These men who are working on the roads can just do as they want to do.

I do not want to be hard on anybody, but if we pay money we should get a good return for it. I am satisfied that one of the reasons why the men do not work is because the wage is small. The wage is bad and it should be better. Too many men get into road work schemes in a backhand fashion. They have the pull. Many decent men who would work from dawn till dark cannot get road-work because they have not the pull. I ask the Minister to clean that up and see we get a sufficient return for the money we spend.

There is a great deal of talk about tuberculosis. Anyone would think the country was reeking with it and that we are all rotten. A lot of that talk is wrong. We must realise that there has been a big war and there is a lack of necessary food and a lack of building materials. Our people are in a bad position. If you have good houses, adequate wages and a clean system of living, tuberculosis will be wiped out.

You will always have tuberculosis to a certain extent, but I do not know that we require a big number of sanatoria. I believe that if we had one decent sanatorium in a central position to deal with persons who wished to enter it, it would be sufficient. We could then concentrate on the provision of far more decent houses and direct our efforts towards giving people better wages. If a man can get a decent home, a decent meal and a decent bed, he will be able to fight any disease.

I do say that many of the back streets in our little towns and villages require to be cleaned up. The living conditions in many of the houses in these back streets are deplorable. Many splendid houses were built in the last ten or 15 years, but if you went into them to-day you would find a terrible stench. I am sorry to have to say these things but I think they are true. If we could educate our people to more cleanly habits, I think we would require much less money to combat tuberculosis. Half of the tuberculosis that we hear about is brought about through slovenly living. I know, of course, that tuberculosis is often due to the fact that people become unemployed and that they become careless about their food, but I think there should be some system of inspection to ensure that people will keep their houses clean. We provided them with splendid houses, with lovely surroundings and gardens. Many of these houses were equipped with splendid sanitary arrangements but these sanitary arrangements to-day are in a sad way.

Mr. O'Leary

And we charge them high rents.

Captain Giles

High rents are not being charged for these houses, and I believe that many of these people could make a better effort to keep them clean if they wanted to do so. These remarks may apply only to a minority of the tenants, but they are giving a bad example and bringing a bad name to their neighbours. There is no reason why new houses should be allowed to become filthy. These people were provided with bright, new houses which their fathers or grandfathers never thought they would see.

So far as sewerage schemes are concerned, I am satisfied that we have not a sufficient number of these schemes, but I think there is a big snag in starting such schemes. In County Meath a number of schemes were completed by the local authorities but they never gave any satisfaction, simply and solely because the people would not make the necessary connections. You would perhaps find eight or ten people who would make the necessary connections and ten or 12 who would not. There should be some arrangement made before a scheme is started to ascertain whether the people will connect their houses with the main scheme and will know the cost which that will entail.

A scheme was introduced in Moynalty some years ago and two years ago there was a report that there was a stoppage and that the smell around Moynalty was something terrific. It was really a fact that the whole scheme was choked up and the sewage that should have been carried away was being poured out in the streets. I do not think that reflects much credit on the people who allow those things to happen. I am not blaming the Minister for such conditions, but I say that before a sewerage scheme is started in a town or village, there should be an obligation on every person within a reasonable distance of the mains to make the necessary connection. They should be very glad to have sewerage facilities and to get water when they turn on a tap. We in the country can never hope to get such facilities. I suppose we shall have to wait hundreds of years before we can enjoy the fruits of such schemes.

The town of Dunshaughlin at present is without a proper water supply. I know that Deputy Dr. O'Higgins would be able to speak with more authority on this matter but there is something wrong with the water there. The pumps have to be bound up, and the people have practically no water. Some of them are drinking water taken out of the ditches and some of them are going to their neighbours' pumps. The neighbours very often have to turn them away because they have not water for themselves. A progressive town or village like Dunshaughlin should receive immediate attention as it is very unfair that some 20 or 40 houses should be deprived of a proper water supply.

As regards cottages, we shall have to consider some method of grouping cottages and houses generally in future building schemes. It is hoped that in the near future a supply of electricity will be available all over the country but there is no use in erecting houses higgledy-piggledy if we want them to enjoy sewerage schemes, water supplies and electricity. I hold that we should provide houses of a somewhat larger type than the ordinary cottage. I do not mean that they should be a good deal bigger but there should be at least 12 or 20 of a fairly decent size in every village and right outside these cottages could be built. Then all these houses could be provided with sewerage, water supplies and all modern facilities. Our workers could then enjoy a decent standard of living. Of course it is sometimes contended that to enable a progressive agricultural policy to be carried out we must have cottages on the farmers' land. In County Meath, cottages were dotted all over the county and I remember that some years ago we could not get applicants for some of these cottages. I know they were built in a wrong situation and no one would take them. At the present moment, however, when a cottage becomes vacant, there are ten or 15 applicants for it and the crying need of the moment is for more cottages. Under future housing schemes, an effort should be made to group the houses as far as it is possible to do so. In County Meath large tracts of land have been divided and on the ordinary small farmer's holding of ten, 20 or 30 acres, there is no room for cottages. Very few of these holdings can afford to give away an acre of land for a cottage but where a big field is available it should be taken over so that the houses could be grouped.

So far as the County Management Act is concerned, we find in County Meath that it is working reasonably well. That, of course, may be due to the fact that we were lucky to get a decent type of county manager. We have, of course, our politics and we fight like tigers when jobs are being given away, but at the same time when it comes down to the ordinary routine work, we get along very well. The county manager gives us every assistance. If we had a bad manager, things, of course, might be different.

I suppose the Act will be reviewed at some future date and I think on the whole that that is not a bad thing because the ordinary people are taking very little interest in public affairs nowadays. It is very hard either for Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael or Labour to get a decent type of representative. In my opinion it will be very difficult to get a desirable type of representative to stand at the next election. The old people had a tradition of public life and they loved to be on the county council to do whatever they could in the interests of their respective localities. It is very hard to get that type of representative to-day because you have taken practically all powers away from local bodies. I do not know what powers you can restore to them, but we should strive to bring back the old administration and to get the type of representative who loved public life because it afforded him an opportunity of doing something for the community in general. Many of the present-day representatives merely work in the interests of their friends and say: "I had nothing when I started and I will have nothing when I finish." We want the small farmer and the decent labourer who stood for stability in the country and who had a tradition of decency in public life. We want that type of person as public administrators. If we could keep men of that type on our public bodies it would not matter what Government came in or what Government went out, public administration would be clean and decent.

I am glad that things in my county have improved vastly over the past ten years. For a few years people went mad about politics, and there was a good deal of job-hunting. Nobody could get a job unless he had the proper pull. There was a good deal of wangling going on—we had some very good, clean administration, I admit, in my county for 25 or 30 years—and in the case of the Meath Board of Health it had in its service a lady who stood up to the rigours of the Black and Tans. She did her work in defying England at that time. What happened to her? She was absolutely taken by the back of the neck and put out on a pension of £450 a year at the age of 40 years. She was the victim of that kind of mean conduct. She is enjoying herself to-day, in the full vigour of her health, laughing at the mugs who had to take her place. I am glad that the people are beginning to realise that it does not pay to do that kind of thing, and I say that things are not now as bad as they were.

Mr. Cafferky

The Minister seemed to be in very good humour when introducing his Estimate. He severely criticised the Opposition in regard to their administration during their term of office. He seemed to feel that we owed him some compliments because he has erected a certain number of houses, and for giving the country 12 social services. If we have got these from the Minister, I am sure he is well aware that it is the taxpayers who are paying for them, and also that things were running rather more smoothly when he came into office than they were when his predecessors took office. We have been told that the country requires 60,000 or 70,000 more houses. Even so, there is still a severe shortage of houses. The Minister may say that is due to a shortage of materials—timber, slates and other essentials during the emergency. I suggest that these should have been secured before the outbreak of war. If any foresight had been shown they could have been imported and stored. Obviously, the Government lacked that foresight. They had no preparations made in advance to meet the conditions which developed during the war.

During the emergency our tradesmen, because of the lack of materials, had to leave the country, so that if a start is now made on housing schemes it is quite likely that we shall have a shortage of skilled tradesmen. It is doubtful if many of them will come back, or even if they do that they will be able to get constant employment.

Government planning in regard to housing has not been what one would have expected. It has been too haphazard. There is a scarcity of houses not only in the large areas like Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Waterford, Sligo, Galway and other provincial centres, but in the small towns and villages throughout the country as well. In every one of these small centres there is a necessity for more houses. In my opinion there is good reason for disappointment with the design of the new houses in the rural areas. It is old fashioned and not in keeping with modern developments, cleanliness or hygiene. Surely a Government in office at this time should realise that there should be proper sanitation in every house, and that conveniences should be provided to make the work in the kitchens easier for the housewife who, instead of having to go a quarter of a mile for water, should be able to have a supply of hot and cold water in the kitchen. The kitchen, too, should be separated from the rest of the house. Instead of that the position is that one has to go through the kitchen to get to the dining-room or to a bedroom in many houses in rural Ireland. The houses that have been built there under the present régime are no credit to the Minister or to his predecessor either. With regard to the roofing, I feel myself that tiles are too heavy. In a few years I am afraid that they will have a serious effect on houses so far as the weight and the span are concerned. Some medical authorities hold that, from the health point of view, tiles are not the best kind of roofing. They are, of course, a native material. I am a supporter of native industry, but if we are not going to get proper results from the use of native material then one cannot very well support it. We produce slates, and I believe if that industry were properly developed we could have a sufficient quantity of slates for roofing. With regard to the social services, the Minister talked about free boots, free shoes and free fuel.

Mr. MacEntee

He did not. The Deputy cannot have been here.

Mr. Cafferky

I read that. I understood that the Minister referred to the fact that there were at least 12 social services—free boots and free shoes. I think that will be found in the unrevised report of the Minister's speech.

Mr. MacEntee

I made one passing reference to footwear.

Mr. Cafferky

The Minister made a comparison between the amount now spent on social services and the amount that was spent on them by his predecessors when they were in office. I want to point out to the House that, in my opinion, many of these social services such as free boots, free shoes and free fuel are a kind of humiliation, an insult to the people who receive them. I understand that the policy of this Government is a policy of free this and free that—on a hand to mouth basis. Is that what we are to enjoy under this glorious republic? Are these social services the security which the Irish people are going to have under a continuance of Fianna Fáil administration? The sooner it ends the better for the country and for the working classes. I admit that we shall always have sections of the community which will have to be provided for through social services—the old, the infirm, the blind, the widow and the orphan; but when it comes to the physically fit men and women they should have employment to enable them to help build up the country. They should not have to live in this miserable way which degrades and humiliates them. If people were asked to live under such conditions by the foreign régime that we had in the country up to 1922, we would have had a revolution. We are now asked to look upon these things as something glorious—something that would not be done by any other Government.

The Minister should be the last man to mention some of those social services. He should be the last man to admit that thousands are depending on free boots, free shoes, free butter and free bread. Is that what we are to get from the Government for the next three or four years? They asked to be returned in 1939 on the strength of the social services they had established. But they have failed in solving unemployment and in placing young men and women in security. That would be better for the country than robbing the people of their self-respect by forcing them to eat out of the hands of Fianna Fáil and the Government. I understand that old age pensions do not come under this Estimate, but I should like to protest against the system by which old age pensioners draw the supplemental allowance of 1/6 or 2/6 in relation to the cost of living. I think that that is humiliating and degrading. We ask our old and infirm people, who have given so much to the State, to go to the relieving officer and there prove that they are down and out, that they have nothing left in the world but this miserable sum of 10/-, in order to obtain 2/6 or, in my county, 1/6. That is a disgrace and I cannot understand why this allowance is not paid through the post office, as the 10/- pension is paid. If portion of the allowance is paid by the local authority, why is not that sum sent to the central authority and paid through the post office as the pension proper is paid? It is an insult to the old age pensioner and it is bringing him to the level of the down-and-out to compel him to adopt this procedure. Who would have thought that, when the Party opposite attained to office, this is the type of administration they would have, that they would not leave office until they had brought the old age pensioner to the verge of degradation?

The old age pensioner, to obtain this allowance, must go to the nearest relieving officer. He may find 20 or 30 others there at the same time and the relieving officer may not arrive at all. There is no guarantee that, if he goes again, the relieving officer will be there. When he does come in contact with the relieving officer, he must state his case so that the relieving officer may decide whether he is entitled to the 2/6 or 1/6 to defray the increased cost of living. Does the Minister realise that the cost of living has gone up threefold and that 2/6 is a miserable contribution towards that increased cost? We find the Government boasting of what they have done for the poor. They have made the poor poorer and the rich richer. On the opposite benches, we have members getting up and opening their remarks with the sentence "I wish to congratulate the Minister" or "I think Deputies should congratulate the Minister and his Department...." Why have they not sufficient spunk to get up and say what is in their mind and not try to gloss it over? They congratulate the Minister and then they go on to point out injustices to their constituents. Why do they not admit that the people are disgusted with the present Administration? We are told by the Minister that we are to have a new system of modern highways, somewhat similar to those which existed in Germany and Italy and to those which are to be seen around the City of London. I do not object to modern highways. If the finances of the State can afford the construction of modern highways, by all means let us have modern highways. But we should take into consideration other types of roads. I am aware that the Minister is not responsible for the roads known as by-roads. The Minister will argue that, if he assumed responsibility for these by-roads, it would be impossible to find the finance necessary for their maintenance.

While he would argue that, he tells us that we must have modern highways immediately, that the cost will run into many millions of pounds and that some of it will be contributed by the ratepayers. The result will be an appreciable increase in the rates. Does the Minister really believe that the ratepayers are desirous of having those modern highways at the expense of an increase in the rates? I maintain that they are not. If the present roads were repaired and brought up to pre-war standard, they would serve for a number of years further. Many ratepayers rely on these by-roads for the taking of their produce to and from the markets. The by-roads are so neglected that these people have to travel ankle-deep in mud and slush. These ratepayers have a claim upon the Minister for Local Government and, if there is money to spare for the construction of roads, then these roads should come before the modern highways of which the Minister speaks. It is a scandal that, in my county, there are so many by-roads badly in need of repair. The Minister will not take responsibility for their maintenance and they are, apparently, to remain in their present condition until the end of this Dáil. In the county estimate made at Castlebar, we included a levy of 4d. per £. Our intention was that the proceeds of that levy should be brought into the rates and used for the repair and maintenance of these by-roads, particularly their repair. That 4d. would mean so many thousand pounds and would run roughly into £170 to £200 per councillor in the county. That could be used to defray the contributory sum required to meet this rural improvement scheme. I agree that the scheme could be a success in some areas, but not in all, as in certain areas the people have not the money to contribute, since their holdings are too small and too poor.

The idea of the councillors—Fianna Fáil, Clann na Talmhan and Fine Gael —was that part of this money would be used to mitigate or reduce the 25 per cent. contributory sum required, but the Minister deliberately bluepencilled the whole idea and would not accept it. If that had been done for three years, it would mean that every by-road would be brought up to a certain standard of repair and condition. Then we could revert back and use the sum for some other purpose.

The Minister refuses to listen to any sensible suggestion in this House or outside it. Deputy Davin asked him if it was true that, when he calls his managers to come to Dublin, he reminds them that they should not be sending up certain resolutions to him. The Minister quite candidly admitted that that was a fact. Perhaps these resolutions embarrass him, but I think it is dictatorship. It is as dictatorial as when Hitler called Schuschnigg to Berlin and dictated to him that Austria and Germany should unite, and when Schuschnigg tried to put his viewpoint on Austria's independence, Hitler roared and bullied at him. The Minister has called the Schuschniggs of the Twenty-Six Counties together and they are told, when they dare to send a protest, whether passed unanimously or otherwise, that he will make them toe the line. That is dictatorial in essence and practice. We of Clann na Talmhan are not here to beg the Minister to do this or that, or to listen to this or that: we are here to demand, and I am demanding to-night that he take upon himself the responsibility of having those by-roads, which are so much in need of repair and reconstruction, repaired and reconstructed, wherever the money is to come from. If he cannot find the money, let him put an end to the building of those modern highways which he has started on in my county, until those other roads are up to scratch, and which are far more important to the ratepayers.

I admit I am not seeking the repair and maintenance of every by-road which may serve only one or two houses, but where a road serves ten, 15 or 20 little farms it should be considered and seen to. It will be argued by the Minister: "Do we not vote a certain sum annually, a voluntary sum, towards the minor improvements scheme?"

That sum is voted only in areas where there is a certain number of unemployed. In my county there are many areas into which that money never finds its way and so the roads there are neglected. Some of them could scarcely be called anything but footpaths, as they were never intended for vehicles, for horses and carts or ponies and carts, for lorries or tractors or threshers. Are we not as much entitled to bring our tractor or thresher on a by-road to thresh the corn as is the man living on the public highway and paying rates in just the some way? We had that debated here some time ago and asked the Minister to take complete responsibility, but the motion was defeated, although his Parliamentary Secretary, now sitting beside him, made no case against it.

In regard to the sanatoria system, Deputy Giles told us that tuberculosis is only all talk and is non-existent. Deputy Burke—a Mayo man representing a constituency in Dublin—tells us that the Government is doing everything feasible to curb the spread of tuberculosis. It is almost two years since the Bill went through the House. I want to ask the Minister how far he has advanced in the direction of providing any of these institutions or sanatoria.

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy ought to have been here last night and would have heard then.

Mr. Blowick

It was not very far.

Mr. Cafferky

The sanatorium in my county is absolutely inadequate to meet the needs. On Saturday week, we had the pleasure of having Dr. Thornton, the resident medical authority attached to the Creagh Sanatorium, in the council. He was brought there on account of a question I raised last December, regarding the internal administration of the sanatorium, and he had to admit there that, since last December up to that day, he had failed to get a cook for the sanatorium and failed to get two maids they were short of, so they were working with an inadequate staff. The reason he gave was that the wages there were not sufficient to entice a cook to come in and work, and due to the statute they cannot raise the wages of the cook or the staff. It is deplorable that they are prevented by legislation from increasing the wages of cooks and maids in the Creagh sanatorium. At least, that is what I was given to understand. The Minister might say that that is not true, but I am quoting the doctor's words for him.

Mr. R. Walsh

On a point of order, I was listening to that discussion with Deputy Cafferky and do not remember the doctor saying anything of that description. He said there was difficulty in getting maids and getting staff, but as far as my memory goes he did not say it was a question of wages, but rather a question of the isolation of the institution and the lack of amenities.

Mr. Blowick

And the wages.

Mr. R. Walsh

He did not say so much about wages.

Mr. Cafferky

If Deputy Walsh's memory or hearing is better than mine, I accept his correction. I took the doctor to have said that, but if his correction is correct I accept it as being correct. Not only did I take him to say that there existed a bar on the increasing of wages of the cooks or staff in the sanatorium, but that the sanatorium was built in a rather lonely place, surrounded by bogs and in a sparsely wooded district, which is three miles from Claremorris. When he made that suggestion, I said: "Would not an increase in wages coax people to come in and work?" and I understood him to say he could not give any increase. If I am wrong, I accept the correction. The position is that the number of beds in the Creagh sanatorium is not adequate to meet the needs of the people suffering from that particular disease in County Mayo. No matter what Deputy Giles may say, we must admit that tuberculosis has a hold in the country and there is no use shutting our eyes to that fact. I admit that Deputy Giles is correct when he says that better housing, better food, better clothing and better conditions generally would help us to eliminate the disease. However, that is no argument against the fact that the disease does exist here and, if we cannot remove it from those whom it has visited, let us at least prevent it from increasing.

There is a point I would like to make, which was made by one of the Labour Deputies and which I raised this time last year and the year before. It is in regard to the failure of the Department to take the necessary steps to see that road workers and bog workers are paid weekly.

Deputy Davin, who has experience of office work, told us how he could surmount the difficulty in relation to the payment of wages weekly. He told us that a bigger problem was surmounted in the concern he referred to than that which confronts a local body. Yet, we find that if a man goes to work on the bog or on the roads, and has a wife and family dependent upon him, they are expected to live on fresh air for a fortnight before any money is forthcoming. I wonder would the Minister like to have to wait for two months before he received his allowance. I imagine that if it was due one day over the period he would go to the finance authorities about it. Bog workers and road workers or any other class of workers should be paid weekly. I do not think it would take a great mathematician to prepare a time sheet showing the earnings of any worker. In other countries, even if a man works for only one day, he will find that his money will be forthcoming when he clocks out in the evening. Why have workers here to wait for a fortnight for their wages? Is it that we are stupid or that the educational system is so damnably weak that there are not sufficient clerks available to have the time sheets prepared at the end of the week? This matter has been mentioned several times by Deputies of all Parties. The day when food could be got on credit has passed. Nobody wants to undergo the humiliation of going into a shop to beg for goods until the cheque comes from the county council. Surely under the republic we should not be asked to stoop to that kind of thing.

I want to impress upon the Minister the necessity of providing more houses in rural districts, and for increased grants for the repair of houses in these districts. Very little work can be done for £40 to-day owing to the cost of labour and materials. The amount of building work that could be done for £40 is not worth mentioning. Work of that kind is more important than the building of modern highways. We should cater for essential things which affect the health and the welfare of the people. We should not put the cart before the horse. When catering for rural housing we should also try to encourage better designs and planning.

In County Mayo, where the farming community contributes towards sewerage schemes and the provision of proper sanitary arrangements in towns, I suggest that those who work on the land, whose work is of a dirty nature, are just as much entitled as others to such amenities as baths and lavatories. They should be able to have a bath on a Saturday night as well as those living in the towns. The Minister may say that the obstacles to the provision of such amenities are insurmountable. They are not, and until these obstacles are surmounted Deputy Giles and others will complain of dirty houses.

Captain Giles

I never said any such thing.

Mr. Cafferky

How could houses be clean when the people have not the opportunity of keeping them clean? It is ridiculous to assert that if baths were provided people would not use them. Perhaps a small percentage of people might not use them, but that is due to their environment, as many of them have lost heart as a result of the existing social system. I maintain that if baths are improperly used and if some houses are dirty, that is due to unemployment and to the social conditions for which the Minister is responsible—free bread, free fuel, no security, even at the hands of a Government that they have not the courage to throw over at election time. They fear that another Government would not be able to give them the same assistance and think that half a loaf is better than nothing. That is the system these people have been brought up on. I hope the Minister will give the matters I mentioned the consideration to which they are entitled. No doubt, when he is replying, I shall get a little of his tongue, but that does not frighten me. I am well accustomed to that now. It falls like water off a duck's back.

Mr. O'Leary

In his opening statement the Minister dealt mainly with the provision of extra beds for a few hospitals and sanatoria. I should like to quote the words of a great churchman, which appeared in the newspapers a few months ago. The extract is headed: "Slow bleeding to death" and is as follows:—

"Emigration on a large scale is a slow bleeding to death of our nation, and yet we seem resigned to it and as fatalists to await our doom," says the Bishop of Clonfert, Most Rev. Dr. Dignan.

"The last 20 years have seen wonderful political success gained for Ireland, but is it not time domestic affairs should receive more attention? For God and country our young people must be kept at home, and they must have such a livelihood that they will be enabled to marry early and to bring up in their Catholic homes children in conditions that will meet the high standards of living in this, the 20th century of civilisation. These wages can be had in the Ireland of to-day. Our country is largely undeveloped, and consequently there can be abundant work for all. The required `money' is there, for our credit is of the very highest—in fact, we are one of the few creditor nations in the world— but we seem to lack the will to make use of our God-given advantages and the talent to work out and put into operation an economic policy that will give constant employment and a family wage...."

These words are stronger than any that I could put before the Minister. That great churchman has put before him a social policy for the people. I must condemn Deputy Brennan for running down the workers and Deputy Giles who talked about the old man hobbling along the road. God help the men who had to live under those two contractors or farmers—whatever they are—if all they can do is to get up here and attack the old road worker who has given 40 or 50 years' service to the county council. Neither of them would say it at the cross-roads when looking for votes, and I hope the people will remember what they said.

The provision of £265,750 for the treatment of tuberculosis is not enough. If this disease is to be tackled and its spread stopped, it will be necessary to use the money in the National Health Insurance Fund and the £8,000,000 in the Hospitals Trust Fund. If we want to have a healthy nation, there is no use in trying to build up that healthy nation on the basis of the miserable 10/- for the old age pensioner or the miserable 5/- for the widow. The Minister ought to do more than he is doing, and I do not compliment any Fianna Fáil or Opposition Deputy for congratulating the Minister on the building of a few houses. What was done in some cases? Old age pensioners, widows and unemployed were taken from snug little cabins, some of which they owned themselves, and put into big houses with big windows and big kitchens, but with no fires and with no money to pay the rent, except what they could get in home assistance. Would anybody not build a house to make money?

With regard to sanatoria, the provision of these institutions is a big problem and I agree with Deputy Cafferky in his remarks about the difficulty of getting cooks or domestic servants for them. Why should domestic servants go into these institutions for 7/6 and 10/- a week, if they get that much, under a local authority? We have a sanatorium in Enniscorthy, and, since I came into the Dáil, I have been agitating to get the doctor to reside near that institution, but what do we find? The county medical officer, as Deputy Corish said, lives in Wexford and they have to depend on a lady doctor who runs up and down whenever she likes. That is the position with regard to Brownswood Sanatorium, as the Minister knows.

According to the report of the county medical officer which I have here, the incidence of tuberculosis is increasing every day, and, at the same time, we can only provide £265,750 to deal with it. I was told by the Parliamentary Secretary, in reply to a question a few weeks ago, that there was a sum of £8,000,000 in the Hospitals Trust Fund, but that it would not be in the public interest to state where that money is invested. That money should be used now if we are anxious to stop the ravages of this terrible disease.

We talk about what we are doing for other people, but charity begins at home. The fathers of families are to-day going to the labour exchange to collect a few paltry shillings dole or to the relieving officer for home assistance and to-morrow the position will be aggravated when men from the Army find that their stamps are exhausted. When they have exhausted their stamps, there is nothing for them to do but go to the relieving officer.

Deputy Brennan advocated a "grow more grass" policy. His policy is to grow more grass on the roads. Of, course, he is a contractor and it will be easier for him to put down a sewerage scheme where there is a grass margin than it will be where there is concrete or tar macadam. That is what he is interested in. Deputy Davin referred to the rents of cottages in his constituency, and I was surprised to hear how low they were—2/3, 2/6 and 3/8. In my town, they are 10/-, 7/6, 8/-, with slum-dwellers' houses 4/2. In the case of the slum houses, the rent is 1/9, the rates bringing the amount up to 4/2, and every year they are going up 1d. and 2d. We have a scheme of 100 houses awaiting sanction in the Department. At the last meeting of the urban council, I asked if any word had been received as to the sanctioning of that scheme, and I was told there was none. I admit that there were snags during the emergency and the snag to-day is that there is no timber available. Ships are available for the import of oranges and bananas and tomatoes, but none to bring in the necessary materials for the building of houses.

We had a bombshell in the Wexford County Council some time ago. A contractor intimated that he was prepared to build houses at £370. The county manager would not give the name of that contractor, but I had an idea who he was. He was a Fianna Fáil contractor who intended to build a toy type of house. When the man's name subsequently became known, the county council members, and especially the Fianna Fáil members—Deputy Allen is chairman of the council— dropped the scheme, because, they said, they did not like that type of house, when the contractor's name was made known.

Now Deputy Brennan is a contractor. He comes in here to this House and he expatiates on Government policy. I suppose it is part of his function to do that and nobody finds fault with him for that; but he attacked the workers in this country and said that they were not pulling their weight. He spoke of the tradesmen. Certainly a tradesman, a skilled worker, is entitled to more pay. His skill demands it. Deputy Brennan has to-day a relation of his own who is a tradesman. Where is he? He is down in Enniscorthy advising and supervising the unemployed on a relief scheme in Enniscorthy. He got that position because he was chairman of the Fianna Fáil club. This matter is no secret. On the eve of the last general election there was a house vacant in Enniscorthy; several married men with families had been looking for that house. That house was given away the night before the election to a man who had only been married a few days——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is away from the Vote altogether.

Mr. O'Leary

Other Deputies in this House rambled all over the place when speaking on this Vote.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Oh, no. That is not so.

Mr. O'Leary

Indeed, they did. You were not here, of course, Leas-Cheann Comhairle. It was the Ceann Comhairle who was in the Chair.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy must not make allegations against the Chair.

Mr. O'Leary

If I am not going to be allowed to proceed in my own way I shall go another way. The Minister made statements against other members of this House when they were not here in his opening speech.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy must not make any imputations against the Chair.

Mr. O'Leary

I heard Deputy Giles speak at some length in regard to the county managers. What have the county managers done? Every county manager who has been appointed has been appointed solely on political grounds, at £1,000 a year and expenses, in every county in which they have been appointed in the Twenty-Six Counties. Can any Deputy in this House deny that? There are not many Deputies in the House now.

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy ought not to direct the Leas-Cheann Comhairle's attention to the state of the House because he may come to a very sudden stop if he does.

Mr. O'Leary

I have been here all day since 3 o'clock, and I had to wait until 20 minutes past ten to make myself heard.

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy is too modest; he should have got up earlier.

Mr. O'Leary

You sat there all the time with only one member of your own Party behind you. Once Question Time is finished everybody goes away.

Mr. MacEntee

I do not see many of the Deputy's own supporters here.

Mr. O'Leary

They are not far away. The Minister should get down to facts and not treat the House to such a speech as he did yesterday, discoursing at length on the people who had occupied the office of Minister for Local Government prior to his taking it over, and so on. I think the Minister rambles somewhat, too, and the Ceann Comhairle did not check it.

Mr. MacEntee

Yes, he did.

Mr. O'Leary

The Minister went back to Deputy Mulcahy's time in Local Government and he spoke about the work he did in connection with housing and so on. I would appeal to the Minister to forget all about his predecessors and their work. There is work to be done now. That is the only important consideration; and the Minister has promised the people that that work will be done. There is nothing to prevent the Minister putting his policy into operation as rapidly as possible. The war is over—well over. The war situation saved the Minister for the last five or six years. The unemployed had to emigrate in their thousands. The time has come now when the Minister should put his schemes into operation with all possible speed. We have heard a good deal about post-war plans and the schemes which were going to be put into operation when the emergency ceased. The emergency is over now. Where are the schemes? As far as one can see, matters are getting worse daily instead of better.

I made some reference to the county managerial system. I remember the time when the County Management Act was going through this House. I was not a member of this House then but I do know that when a division was taken no Deputy in the House opposed the Bill. To-day I listened to some Deputies criticising that Act; that is the Act for which they voted several years ago. I have been a member of the local authorities since 1934. I say now that if we had the powers which we should have matters would be considerably improved. As things stand at the moment entire responsibility is left to one man. His authority has to be deferred to on every occasion. If an unfortunate person makes an application for home assistance that matter must be brought to his attention. Hitherto, the local authority could have dealt with it themselves. That is how the poor people are adversely affected by the operation of the County Management Act. The Minister sent circulars out to us notifying us as to what powers we had. The only power we have now is to go into the mental hospital. You can talk to the madmen there as long as you like. If a madman hits a warder, or an attendant, and a complaint is made, nothing happens; but if a warder hits a madman and the doctor finds it out, that warder is suspended or sacked. Those are the powers under the county managerial system.

I think, being a poor man myself, that I am best qualified from experience to speak about the poor and the living they make. Every class of worker to-day is finding it very difficult to make ends meet. Taking the fact into consideration that the wage earners have difficulty, how much more impossible must be the situation for those unfortunate people in receipt of home assistance? How are the unfortunate people living on the dole managing? How could any person live on 10/- a week? Those are the facts. Let any member of this House go on the dole to-morrow morning and see how long he will be able to carry on. The fact is that the bulk of our people are on the verge of starvation to-day. Twelve months ago the Parliamentary Secretary said that he did not believe any substantial number of the people were living in starvation. Of course, he did not believe it. But I believe it because I am living in the midst of them and they are coming to me every day of the week looking for home assistance. The same thing is happening in every other county. The Government must have those facts within its knowledge.

It is the duty of the Government to relieve those people who are in dire need. That is the work that has to be done and the time has come when a stop should be put to all this talk about the past and all this talk about bringing foreigners into the country in the future. Think of the poor people now—the people who put you into power. They are the people who changed the Government in 1932 and they changed the Government then because Mr. Blythe, the then Minister for Finance, cut the old age pensions by 1/-. A new generation is coming along now and the young men and women of to-day will not tolerate the conditions that their fathers before them tolerated—misery, starvation, and low wages. The Minister to-day is responsible for the low rates of wages paid by the county councils. A few weeks ago he authorised an increase of 3/- a week to the road workers of County Wexford and County Tipperary. Wages were pegged down to the very lowest level. That is true, too, of the turf workers. If a man to-day is drawing 5/- a week he is not permitted to leave the country. If the agricultural labourer is unemployed he cannot get away either. I move to report progress.

Progress reported; the Committee to sit again.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Friday, 14th June, 1946.