Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 20 Jul 1948

Vol. 112 No. 5

Committee on Finance. - Adjournment Debate—Employment on Brosna Drainage Scheme.

It is with regret that I rise to occupy the time of the House in view of the great importance of the work which it is undertaking at the moment and the necessity for speed with regard to the passage of the Estimates. I certainly would not have asked for time to raise this question on the adjournment if I did not consider that it is of major importance to my constituency. I very much appreciate that the scheme for the drainage of the Brosna is a national scheme. It is a very important scheme and it is the only one scheme in operation under the Arterial Drainage Act. The people of Offaly very deeply appreciate the work which is being undertaken by the Office of Public Works and the start which was made on the Brosna has been welcomed by everybody concerned and by all the public representatives in the constituency. To-day, on the question of the Brosna Drainage Scheme, I asked the Minister for Finance if he would state the number of men employed to date on the scheme and the rates of wages paid to gangers and workers; further, whether it is proposed to increase the rates of pay to the workers concerned and, if so, when the new rates will be announced and put into operation. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance replied to the effect that the number of men employed on the Brosna Drainage Scheme for the week ended 10th July, 1948, was 183 and that the rates of wages are: gangers, £5 per week and labourers, £3 per week. He also said that the question of increasing the rates has not arisen. If the Fianna Fáil Government gave me that reply in this House this time 12 months ago— if the Brosna Drainage Scheme was then in operation—I would raise the roof clean off this House, and I am going to take no such reply from the present Minister or from the present Parliamentary Secretary. I have played a major part in bringing about a change of Government in this country with a view to bringing about better times and improving the conditions of the workers. I am damned if I will stand here and be faced with the very same replies to-day as we were getting from the Fianna Fáil Ministers in the past. I am raising this question, realising that not one of the Fianna Fáil Deputies from this constituency is in the House and that the only——

Nor from any other constituency in Ireland.

The Fianna Fáil Deputy who is in the House is a poor substitute for the Party.

He is such a poor substitute that he cannot listen to the Deputy, anyhow.

Mr. Killilea withdrew.

They have all left now.

I am raising this question in an endeavour to find out if the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance will state whether it is proposed to increase the wages of those workers or not. The reply which he gave to me this afternoon was most unsatisfactory. These men are in receipt of £3 per week. In the local villages they are obliged to pay up to 50/- per week for their lodgings— leaving them 10/- a week to provide for their wives and their families and to keep a bicycle in good running order to bring them to their work and to take them home again. Surely, at this stage in our history, when the cost of living has gone sky high, one cannot be expected to live or to exist on a rock bottom wage of £3 per week, 50/- of which must go on lodgings. How can any man live in Christian decency on 10/- per week? These men have to work hard from morning till night on the Brosna drainage scheme. It is tough work and it is work for which every man is not fit. It is a special type of work. Every man who applies for a job or who is looking for a job is not fit to undertake work on major drainage schemes such as this. Therefore, I cannot see how this Government is going to defend a wage of £3 per week in view of the fact that most of the workers employed on this scheme are obliged to live many miles from home. I fail to understand where the difference comes in of £3 per week for labouring men and £5 per week for gangers. Is there not a very great gap to be filled? I asked the Minister for Finance and his Parliamentary Secretary to-day if it would be possible even to bring the rates of wages of these workers up to the level of the local building trade rate of wages in the district. In the Tullamore area the local rate is 1/8 per hour. The men on the Brosna drainage scheme are obliged to work for 1/3 per hour. The Parliamentary Secretary cannot put forward the argument that this is the same type of work as bog work. It is no such thing. It is much harder and tougher work and, in addition, there is no such thing as piece work on drainage. The men have to work by the day. Bog workers could earn up to £7, £8 and £9 per week on task work. There is no task work on drainage. Therefore, they are nailed down to £3 per week, 50/- of which goes for lodgings, leaving them 10/- on which to exist. Some steps will have to be taken to remedy this situation. All I want from the Parliamentary Secretary is a guarantee or an undertaking that if representations come from the workers' organisation or from the workers' union or from a responsible person on behalf of the workers they will be sympathetically considered. I am anxious that a guarantee will be given for a substantial improvement in the rates of pay for which those poor unfortunate men are obliged to slave at the present time.

It is common knowledge in my constituency that in the districts of Banagher, Ferbane, Belmont and Clogher suitable accommodation is not available in hotels, boarding-houses and other houses for these workers. The respectable people of these towns have endeavoured to accommodate as many of these men as possible, but no boarding house, no hotel and no catering establishments can, in my opinion, cater for a worker and give him three good meals a day and a good bed to sleep on at night, at less than £2, £2 5s. or £2 10s. per week. Therefore, I think I am being reasonable when I ask if it would not be possible for the Board of Works to make inquiries as to what old camps are available from Bord na Móna, and if Bord na Móna are not using those camps, if it would not be possible to have them erected at convenient centres so as to house the workers employed on this scheme. The Parliamentary Secretary may tell me that the scheme moves on and that they cannot bring the camps along according as the excavators move. They can. These turf camps can be removed. A small type of camp can be erected to house 50 or 60 such workers. We do not expect the same menu and the same bedding in those camps as one would find in the Gresham hotel or the Shelbourne hotel. We want decent accommodation for these workers.

If we do as I have suggested, these workers will be in a position then to send something home to their wives and families. At the moment they can send nothing. I trust that the Minister and the Government will take some steps to have conditions improved. The Parliamentary Secretary comes from a rural constituency just as I do. Does the Parliamentary Secretary consider that £3 per week is a suitable wage for any worker? I spoke from many platforms during the election. I made my constituents certain promises and, to the best of my ability, I am prepared to keep those promises. The Parliamentary Secretary made somewhat similar promises to those that I made. He stressed the need of a living wage for all workers. He is now offered the opportunity of making good his promises. The Government, including myself, are now being given an opportunity of proving our sincerity in relation to the Brosna drainage scheme. Camps must be provided for these workers where suitable accommodation is not available or else they must be given increased wages, or an allowance, to meet lodging expenses. It is no wonder that the young men are flying from rural Ireland. They are offered no encouragement to remain at home. No young man would take up employment on the Brosna scheme at £3 per week on work that is both difficult and arduous. It is no wonder that 175,000 of our young men are living outside our country to-day.

I am warning the Government that I am one man who will not stand for any nonsense or codology in my constituency. These men are working hard and earning every penny they get. I hope that the Government and the Minister will sympathetically consider any demand made by these men for decent wages. I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary, in reply, will offer some hope or guarantee that their case will be sympathetically considered. I would not work for £3 per week, and I am sure the Parliamentary Secretary would be the last man to work for £3 per week. For that reason I hope that at an early date we shall see an increase made in the wages offered to the workers on this scheme. If that increase is not given, then I ask that camps shall be erected in order to assist them to help their families. I do not raise this matter here to-night in any contentious spirit. I raise it in sincerity and friendliness. I am 100 per cent. behind the Government and will continue to be 100 per cent. behind it in the future; but I do want to see the workers getting a fair deal. I am anxious that the promises I made shall be fulfilled. We have an obligation to the workers in our respective constituencies. I have an obligation to the workers in my constituency. While I am on this side of the House I shall do all in my power to honour my obligations and to live up to the confidence and trust reposed in me by my constituents.

I am more than surprised at Deputy Flanagan raising this matter on the adjournment. He read out the question addressed to me and my reply. He did not care about the second part where I pointed out that the question of an increase in rates of pay for workers on this scheme had not arisen. When I saw that question this morning there was no mention of rates of pay in it. How, then, could Deputy Flanagan, or any other Deputy, think that I could have done anything with regard to increases in pay? I cannot understand why Deputy Flanagan should get into such a state about the matter.

Why did you offer £3 per week?

When the Estimate for Public Works was introduced on the 30th June, Deputy Flanagan was not in this House at the time when I made a statement wherein I appealed to the people working on the Brosna scheme "who, in my opinion, at the moment, are getting a fair wage. If they think they are not, they have the machinery and, if they think they can make a case, it will get consideration." Surely, that was fair. While I am not prepared to discuss whether or not £3 per week is a satisfactory wage, I do want to point out that one cannot regard these workers as other than agricultural labourers. The work is of the self-same character; it is work for agriculture. Their pay is 60/- per week for a 48-hour week; the agricultural worker in the same area is getting 55/- per week for a 54-hour week. If the workers on the Brosna scheme work overtime they get time and a-quarter. Later on, if they have to work on holidays, they will be paid time and a-half Does any Deputy hold that these workers are anything more skilled than agricultural workers? I was an agricultural worker myself in my time, and I think agricultural workers are second to none in this country. If an increase was made in the rates offered does Deputy Flanagan not realise that it would take away from agriculture in that area every single worker at present engaged in agriculture?

There is none of them at it as it is.

On a point of order, would the Parliamentary Secretary explain whether these workers are local people or imported into the locality?

That is not a point of order.

I would like to know if they are imported.

I think that practically every worker on this scheme comes in on his bicycle in the morning and goes home again on it at night. I would like to know from Deputy Flanagan how many labourers engaged on the Brosna scheme are in board and odgings. My information is that there is not one of them circumstanced like that.

Speaking on behalf of the Government, I may say we have as much interest in these people as has the Deputy. I agree that Deputy Flanagan is interested in them and is a good worker for them. I know the interest he has taken in several cases and I know he did his part without a doubt. But I will ask him to consider the position if we raise the rate of wages. What will happen to the agricultural worker and to the farmer? You cannot take the Brosna drainage scheme as anything other than agricultural work; it is for the benefit of the agricultural community that the scheme is there. If a case can be made, it will get consideration, but I am giving the warning beforehand that I cannot see how the rate of wages for the labourer, who comes there on his bicycle and works his day and gets 60/- for a 48-hour week, can be increased as against the agricultural worker who works 54 hours a week for 55/-. I cannot see how he has a claim.

As regards Bord na Móna, they paid that rate of wages. If such a drainage scheme were operating in the West of Ireland the pay would not be 60/- a week—it would be lower. Our rate of pay depends on the local conditions. That is our point of view. I believe that if Deputy Flanagan had read the statement I made in a recent debate he would not have put down this question at all.

I believe I would.

I am referring to the statement I made on June 30th. If the Deputy read it, I hardly believe he would have put down that question. I would appeal to Deputies, as I did that day, and especially to Labour representatives, that, as regards the drainage schemes, we have in hands or those we are taking on, let there not be any strikes. If there can be a case made, there is ample machinery there so that that case can be heard. They can make their application, but let them get on with the work and let there not be sabotage.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary consider the question of erecting camps for the workers? That would be a good idea. Will he consult officials and see if it would be possible? I am anxious to co-operate. I believe in the erection of such camps. In the event of another 100 or 200 men being employed on the Brosna there will have to be some type of accommodation. There is no accommodation in the villages or towns adjacent to the work.

That matter was also raised on the Estimate and I said I would consider it. We met the commissioners and we discussed it. It will be awkward, for the simple reason that you cannot do what you did in the bogs. There they were on the spot, but in the Brosna they will not be in the same place every week; they will have to shift. You would have camps in one place one month and in another place the next month. They would have to be shifted and the commissioners decided that it would not be feasible to erect camps.

Top
Share