I am very interested in this Vote as a Deputy representing a rural constituency. A great deal of very useful employment can be given by these schemes and the only complaint that I have at this stage is that there does not seem to be sufficient attention given to the many schemes that are submitted year after year by Deputies representing rural constituencies. Of course, for a long time past there has been that trouble. Candidly, I expected that there was a possibility that things might improve during the last year, that rural areas would get more attention, that the works submitted would get more consideration and, in fact, that more money would be made available for the financing of the necessary schemes. I am sorry to say that the amount of money made available is not at all adequate to meet the demand and that, because of that, there has to be a certain apportioning of the money in the Special Employment Schemes Office. In the apportioning of the money each year, only the very necessary works get attention and works which are regarded as being not so urgent are left there year after year. It is very unfair that the wants of people who are fortunate or unfortunate enough to live outside urban areas should be neglected in the manner that they have been neglected for a very long number of years.
Everybody realises that a great deal of time has been spent in endeavouring to get roads leading into small villages and groups of houses brought into a proper state of repair so that the people who live there may be afforded a meagre concession to enable them to carry on their means of livelihood. Year after year, schemes have been submitted. When the Special Employment Schemes Office was set up to deal with these matters directly we felt that something would accrue but there does not seem to be any improvement and some of us who have climbed the flight of stairs in that office thousands of times with bundles of minor employment scheme forms completed, find that our errand has been practically fruitless. While certain works have been carried out, nothing like the amount that we would like to see or that is necessary has been carried out.
My main objection to the administration of the scheme is the regulation in regard to the number of registered unemployed in the area. It is time to scrap the regulation. Work that is necessary in an area should be carried out irrespective of whether there is a number of unemployed in the area or not. There may be an area where there is the necessary number of registered unemployed on one side while on the other side there is not a sufficient number of registered unemployed.
I do not think there would be anything wrong in suggesting that it would be possible to bring the unemployed from one side to the other and to allow them to carry out whatever scheme of work would be most necessary in the area. I have in mind, in particular, localities where the valuations are not very high but where they are reasonably high and where the farmers may have sufficient work on their holdings to give employment to their sons. You have other areas where people may be living four or five miles from a labour exchange. They are very slow to register. They take no pride in marching, week after week, to a labour exchange to register as unemployed. I think cases of that sort should get consideration. We have not yet reached the happy stage where it was known that a locality had to return money because there were not sufficient men there to earn it. If money is provided for the doing of work in an area where there are not registered unemployed, I can assure the Parliamentary Secretary—I have a thorough knowledge of the conditions in rural Ireland—that there will be a sufficient number of men found available to earn the money, and do work that is necessary. I have always objected to the doing of work just for the sake of giving employment. Under a scheme of that sort, simply because you have in an area a continuous number of registered unemployed, you can have money spent on the same works every two or three years. At the same time, areas in which there are not registered unemployed are neglected. That has been going on for a number of years. These areas will continue to be neglected until this whole system is changed.
There has been a motion on the Order Paper dealing with this for the past 15 months. We thought that it would have been up for discussion long since, and that a definite decision would be taken by the Government. We are anxious to know what Government policy is in regard to it, and to be told definitely whether this system of grading certain areas will be abolished altogether. In view, however, of the slowness with which democratic Governments move, I am sorry to think that, after a lapse of more than 15 months, there is not a sign of that motion coming before the House for debate. I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to take notice of that, and, if possible, to make an announcement as to whether it is the intention to do away with this registered unemployed system and carry out works on a broader scale and in a broader manner.
As I said at the outset, the whole thing boils down to the fact that sufficient money does not seem to be made available in any single year for the carrying out of works. The fact is that we, Deputies, who are directly responsible to the people, when we go back to them find them living under the same conditions under which they have been living for the last 40 or 50 years. Every Deputy who comes from the country must admit that at some time or other he has submitted to the Special Employment Schemes Office or to the Board of Works or to whatever Department was there before the Special Employment Schemes Office was set up, a work of some kind or other that has been left untouched for the last 50 years. The oldest resident in a locality can tell one that. It may be a road in one case. The oldest resident will tell you that, as long as he can remember, he has not seen that road get as much as a shovel of gravel or seen £1 expended on it. In another case it may be a drain which is doing immense damage because of the fact that it has not been cleaned up. I think that is grossly unfair, especially in view of the fact that we see other problems not so urgent getting immediate attention. We find that large areas of the country are being left in a derelict condition. They are getting no attention, only, of course, at the time when the local authorities come along to collect rates and rents from the people. The people living in those areas are carrying on under conditions that are most unfair. I think that greater financial aid should be given to the Special Employment Schemes Office to carry out a greater number of works in the areas that I speak of.
I think we must admit that we have neglected our duty, and that we are directly responsible for the complete failure there has been in attending to the interests of people who live in parts of the country which are cut off from the main roads. There has been a lot of talk about increased production and increased output, but the position that I speak of is very unfair, particularly to the members of the farming community. Many of them are in the position at the moment, due to the neglect of the areas in which they reside, that they cannot avail of any modern machinery to enable them to increase production on their land. We have the position that a threshing machine, a reaper and binder or a large lorry for the haulage of turf cannot get into a locality or a village because of the condition of the local road. In many cases these roads are impassable. I have received complaints, and so I am sure have many other Deputies, with regard to children who have to spend the day in school with their feet wet because of the condition of the roads over which they have to travel. We sit here making complaints and talk of the sympathy that we have for those people, but with our eyes shut to the conditions under which they have to live. Now, if there is to be a teasing out in the case of the Special Employment Schemes Office, I hope it will be possible for that office to give more attention to these matters, and particularly to the roads that are under its control.
There is the promise, of course, that the legislation which is before the Dáil at present—the Works Bill and the Land Reclamation Bill—will take a certain amount of work away from the Special Employment Schemes Office. I want to direct attention to two types of schemes which could be of a very beneficial character, namely, the drainage of bogs where the people cut and obtain supplies of fuel for their own needs; and, secondly, the making of accommodation, village or bog roads. I think that the Special Employment Schemes Office might give special attention to these types of schemes. If it were to do so it would be meeting with the wishes of the average Deputy who comes from the country. We all know —the Parliamentary Secretary himself must know it—that in those areas along the western seaboard, where the density of population is very great, the conditions there would, in any other country, be regarded as quite primitive. Until something is done along the lines that I have indicated how can we expect the people to increase production on their land?
I should like to have some indication from the Parliamentary Secretary as to whether anything will be done on these lines by the Special Employment Schemes Office during the coming year. The main schemes carried out by it are, of course, the rural improvement scheme and the minor employment schemes. Both are schemes of a beneficial character. The minor employment scheme, one might say, absolutely drops dead when there is not a sufficient number of registered unemployed in a locality. The policy of paying unemployment benefit or unemployment assistance still seems to get favour rather than the provision of money to enable work to be done in a locality. If we had reached the stage where there was no useful or beneficial work to be done inside an area where you had registered unemployed, we might say that the payment of unemployment benefit would be a wise thing, but in all those localities there is any amount of useful work to be done. We have this position, that a man may be receiving £1 or 30/- a week in unemployment assistance. Would it not be better to give him another £1 or another 30/- a week and put him at some useful work? One begins to scratch his head and wonder, in view of all this, even if we had a change of Government every other week, whether this old system of bungling is to continue for all time, a system which is stopping production and stopping progress, and which represents neglect of the people's interests.
Rural improvement schemes are very beneficial. I have quite a good knowledge of them and the way in which they are carried out. When you get the people to contribute a certain amount to a scheme, they take an immediate interest in it and the output per man for the money expended is very much greater than what would be done under a minor employment scheme. When the people are asked to give a certain subscription to work which they know will be beneficial to themselves, they will be out to make sure that as much work as possible will be done and there will be no lagging or taking things easy; everyone works with a will. My experience of rural improvement schemes is that very useful work is done and everybody seems to be contented when the work is completed. The only thing I find fault with is the contribution of 25 per cent. I think the people will find it hard to pay so much. The people will point across two or three townlands and say: "In that locality a work was done with a 100 per cent. grant, but here, because we have not sufficient on the register of unemployed, we are forced to contribute 25 per cent. of the cost." That is the hard path that has to be followed in some areas before they can carry out a rural improvement scheme.
When proper attention is devoted to a scheme it is carried out very efficiently. I made the suggestion some time ago that the grants for rural improvement schemes should be increased from 75 per cent. to 90 per cent. It would be much easier to collect 10 per cent. from the people and a contribution of that amount would give those concerned that little extra interest in a scheme which will make them work harder. That is something which will help the people concerned and the Government. I think that suggestion could be usefully adopted instead of having a minor employment scheme where the sole object in many cases is to earn a day's or a week's wages. People may not be concerned, unless you have a very efficient ganger or overseer, as to when they will have the work completed or how much work will be done in the day.
I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will give serious consideration to this point, whether it would be an advisable thing to abolish minor employment schemes or schemes entailing full cost grants and concentrate on a 90 per cent. contribution from the Government and a 10 per cent. contribution from the people on the other schemes. In the poorer areas the people are entitled to such concessions as road and drainage schemes; as citizens they are justified in expecting these things from the Government. It is part and parcel of their everyday life. They are making every effort to increase the wealth of the nation and the Government should come to their assistance where-ever possible. If that suggestion were adopted, I have the feeling that much more work will be done for any money that may be expended by the Government.
I am very interested in the improvement works that are being carried out on bog roads, and in the bog drainage schemes. During the emergency, when turf was the national fuel and we were forced to rely on the bogs to keep our fires a-going, we gave every attention to bog development; but when it was discovered that turf development was just an emergency issue and when we thought it possible to import coal of any description, the attention given to the bogs was not nearly so great. There are large numbers of people who rely on turf as a fuel. That has been the position for the past 200 years, and there are at least 50 years ahead before our people will be obliged to turn their attention to some other type of fuel. Turf workers should not be obliged to have to watch the weather cautiously so that they can get a few fine days to remove the turf from the bog. That is the position they are in now, because the bog roads have not been attended to properly for over half a century. If the weather is not favourable they find it very difficult to remove their turf. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will try to get more money made available so that where people are cutting turf to meet their fuel requirements they will be in a position to use serviceable roads. They should not have to wait years for an improvement of the bog roads.
The same thing applies to the drainage of bogs. We know the immense amount of valuable fuel that is lost every year because of the lack of suitable bog drainage. Bog drainage should be carried out every six or seven years. Our bog areas are declining and turf is becoming more valuable and our people should be facilitated so that they can get the maximum quantity out of each turf bank. It is in this connection that a proper system of bog drainage is essential and the Parliamentary Secretary should direct his attention to this important aspect.
The main cause of complaint in relation to special employment schemes is that there is not sufficient money made available. In my county the amount made availeve able last year was approximately the same as what was made available in the preceding year and it was not even one-tenth sufficient to carry out the works that were submitted. If we could only reach the stage when a road accommodating people into their lands, their homes or their bogs could be completed and repairs carried out every six or seven years, we would have achieved something worth while. I think that would not be asking too much from any Government. If we could reach that stage, these people would be satisfied. At the moment we do not seem to get anywhere. I think the chief cause is because sufficient financial assistance is not made available. I would like to see more decentralisation in the carrying out of these schemes. I think that a special office should be set up in each country, the staff of which would have local knowledge of local surroundings. When a scheme is submitted, while everything concerning it may be taken into consideration in the Board of Works, I think special power should be given to local inspectors to make specific recommendations as to the most essential schemes. That would give the man on the job an opportunity of voicing his opinion. I do not know whether that suggestion can be adopted, but I make it in the hope that some attention will be given to it.
With regard to inspection, it is easy enough to get a group of individuals to agree to the carrying out of certain works. We have submitted schemes in the past 12 months. In some cases no inspector has called so far in order to examine the layout and estimate the cost involved. I do not know the reason for the delay. Surely it would not require a genius to examine and estimate the possible cost of laying a quarter of a mile or a mile of road? If there are not sufficient engineers available at present to do that work I suggest that the supervisors and the first-class gangers are fully competent to examine such a proposed work and estimate the cost of it.
With regard to the actual carrying out of such works, I suggest they should be done between the months of October and March so that the people who contribute towards the cost of them will be in a position to benefit by the actual work itself. At the moment these people do not know what they will be called upon to contribute. They do not know the reason for the delay. Something must be done in this respect. The Government must realise that Ireland does not end when one passes out of the suburbs of Dublin. All over the country essential works of this kind are necessary and it is the duty of the Government to ensure that they are carried out with the least possible delay.
The Parliamentary Secretary must put life into his particular office. He must cut out as much waste as possible and any overlapping that may occur. Every time an inspector travels out on one of these schemes it costs money. I have known where a particular scheme has been inspected 18 times in 18 years and yet nothing has been done about it. One must realise that there is waste and overlapping. That is not the fault of the official whose duty it is to examine these schemes. I urge upon the Parliamentary Secretary to cut out some more of the red tape. Every Deputy will be very glad to assist him in speeding up that operation so that these essential works will be carried out for the benefit of the country as a whole.
