asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will state the number and location of bogs in County Galway on which machine-won turf was produced in 1948; the total tonnage produced; the number of machines engaged; the number of weeks' employment given on each bog; the average number of persons employed on each bog; and the average weekly wage per worker.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Production of Machine-Won Turf.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will state the number and location of bogs in County Galway on which machine-won turf will be produced this year; the number of machines to be used; the average estimated number of persons to be employed; the average estimated number of weeks' employment to be given on each bog; whether wages will be on a time or a tonnage basis; and the estimated total amount to be paid in wages.
These two questions are related and I propose to deal with them together.
As the information asked for by the Deputy is of a statistical character, I propose, with the consent of the Ceann Comhairle, to circulate with the Official Report a statement giving the information. Many workers do not work a full week, and to arrive at the average weekly wage per worker would entail an expenditure in the time of office staff which would not be justified by results. Bord na Móna's rate in 1948 was 1/3 per hour, and wherever possible workers were employed on piece rates designed to enable them to earn 25 per cent. over this figure.
Following is the statement:—
EMPLOYMENT, ETC., BY BORD NA MONA IN 1948 ON BOGS IN COUNTY GALWAY.
Machine-won turf was produced in 1948 on 18 bogs in County Galway located as set out hereunder; the number of machines engaged; the number of weeks' employment given on each bog; and the average number of persons employed on each bog are as follows:
|
Bog Name |
In Locality Of |
Tonnage Produced |
No. of Machines |
No. of weeks' employment |
Average Number Employed |
|
|
tons |
||||||
|
1 |
Lurgan |
Tuam |
645 |
2 |
32 |
12 |
|
2 |
Cloonteen |
Tuam |
488 |
1 |
35 |
9 |
|
3 |
Lomanaghroe |
Tuam |
1,633 |
4 |
51 |
19 |
|
4 |
Derrymore |
Ahascragh |
257 |
1 |
26 |
6 |
|
5 |
Gunnode |
Mountbellew |
927 |
2 |
48 |
11 |
|
6 |
Caltraduff |
Ahascragh |
494 |
1 |
29 |
8 |
|
7 |
Killaderry |
Ballyforan |
583 |
1 |
52 |
13 |
|
8 |
Derryfadda |
Ballyforan |
1,201 |
2 |
50 |
13 |
|
9 |
Maam X. |
Maam X |
3,097 |
6 |
52 |
35 |
|
10 |
Bovroughan |
Costelloe |
2,928 |
5 |
52 |
36 |
|
11 |
Loughaunbeg |
Inver |
684 |
3 |
46 |
18 |
|
12 |
Pollnaclogha |
Moycullen |
156 |
1 |
24 |
8 |
|
13 |
Knock |
Spiddal |
637 |
2 |
44 |
18 |
|
14 |
Colmanstown |
Attymon |
642 |
2 |
34 |
11 |
|
15 |
Gortnalone |
Attymon |
81 |
1 |
18 |
5 |
|
16 |
Moyardwood |
Attymon |
353 |
2 |
27 |
9 |
|
17 |
Kilmacshane |
Lawrencetown |
941 |
2 |
52 |
14 |
|
18 |
Kylemore |
Lawrencetown |
1,211 |
2 |
52 |
16 |
ESTIMATED EMPLOYMENT ETC., BY BORD NA MONA IN 1949 ON BOGS IN COUNTY GALWAY.
|
Bog Name |
In Locality of |
Tonnage to be produced |
Estimated No. of machines |
No. of weeks' employment |
Average number to be employed |
|
|
tons |
||||||
|
1 |
Lomanaghroe |
Tuam |
3,000 |
4 |
52 |
30 |
|
2 |
Gunnode |
Mountbellew |
1,600 |
2 |
52 |
16 |
|
3 |
Killaderry |
Ballyforan |
2,700 |
3 |
52 |
25 |
|
4 |
Derryfadda |
Ballyforan |
1,800 |
2 |
52 |
16 |
|
5 |
Maam X. |
Maam X. |
3,000 |
4 |
52 |
30 |
|
6 |
Bovroughan |
Costelloe |
2,100 |
3 |
52 |
25 |
|
7 |
Loughaunbeg |
Inver |
1,400 |
2 |
52 |
16 |
|
8 |
Knock |
Spiddal |
1,400 |
2 |
52 |
16 |
|
9 |
Kilmacshane |
Lawrencetown |
1,500 |
2 |
52 |
16 |
|
10 |
Kylemore |
Lawrencetown |
3,000 |
3 |
52 |
25 |
Wages whenever possible will be paid on piece rates which are designed to enable the average worker to earn a rate of 1/8d. per hour. Where piece rates are not possible, work will be carried out on the board's time rate of 1/4d. per hour.
It is expected that 52 weeks' employment will be given on each bog.
The estimated total amount to be paid in wages is £31,000.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether he is aware that the Minister for Justice stated at a public meeting at Dungarvan on April 10th that the Government's proposals for the expansion of machine-turf production differed from those approved by the previous Government; and, if so, whether he will state if this is correct, and particularly if there have been alterations in the list of bogs to be developed for machine production or in the total production envisaged by the proposals.
I am not aware that the Minister for Justice made a statement at Dungarvan on the 10th April in the terms quoted by the Deputy in the first part of his question. The statement made by the Minister, according to a report in the Irish Press of the 11th April, was that the Government plan as announced by me for the production of machine-won turf was a great advance upon that carried out by their predecessors.
The other parts of the Deputy's question do not arise.
Am I to take it, therefore, that the proposals of the Government for the extension of machine production are precisely those which were submitted by Bord na Móna in 1947?
Not precisely.
In what respect do they differ; either in regard to the bogs to be developed or to the total production to be aimed at?
Is the Deputy disappointed at the carrying out of the scheme?
The Minister appears to be under the impression that I am trying to trick him into something. His colleague said the plans had been changed. I am asking in what respect they have been changed, if that statement by the Minister is correct?
May I assure the Deputy that neither I nor my colleagues are trying to deprive the members of the previous régime of any credit due to them?
Are the bogs which are to be developed under the expanded scheme the same bogs as were contemplated in 1947?
They may or may not be. The Deputy, of course, is aware that those bogs have to be surveyed and until such time the board cannot determine whether those particular bogs will be developed or not. The Deputy is aware of that. May I suggest to the Deputy that any further information he may require will be available when the Bill to give effect to this decision comes before the House?
The Minister for Justice had no further information.
The fact of the matter is that the Deputy did not give in his question the words that the Minister for Justice used.
May I point out that the Minister for Justice was reported as saying that the plans differed from those approved by the previous Government? The Minister said that the plans were an improvement on the previous plans. The indication now is that the plans are precisely the same.
No, I sincerely hope not.