There is one aspect of this matter to which no reference was made since I came into the House except by the Tánaiste, and which is, I think, important. The development of a rational and adequate plan for the construction of Government buildings in Dublin has been regarded as necessary since the foundation of the State. Shortly after the Treaty of 1921 in fact a commission was established to consider that problem. It was thought then that the occupation of these buildings in which we now meet could not continue as they had been temporarily taken over from the College of Science and it was assumed that they would have to go back to the College of Science. The commission were asked to choose between taking over the Bank of Ireland in College Green or the premises which are now used as Garda Headquarters in Kilmainham and probably action would have been taken towards acquiring one or other of these premises but for the fact that some speculation in house property followed the establishment of the commission. It was decided by the Government then in office, the Cumann na nGaedheal Government that nothing should be done for some time and the Dáil continued to meet here and Government Headquarters remained in the College of Science building in Merrion Street. Nothing further of a definite character was done for some years but at some stage between 1924 and 1932 when the Cumann na nGaedheal Government left office a decision was taken by somebody that the Board of Works should acquire any premises coming on the market in the Merrion Square area, there being apparently some idea that the natural growth of Government buildings with the Dáil meeting here would be in that direction.
When we came into office the problem of planning the growth of Government buildings on a long term basis was coming to a head and we had to take certain decisions. We found this tentative decision that development should be in the Merrion Square locality. We found also that some knowledge of that decision was circulating in commercial circles in Dublin, so much so that we contemplated at that time introducing legislation to freeze the values in that locality so that they would not be unduly inflated against the State. I do not say that we were enthusiastic about the idea of developing in the Merrion Square locality, but as considerable property had been acquired there and as it appeared to be the type of development which would be least controversial in the Dáil we were prepared to let it proceed. The Tánaiste talks about a plan for clearing that area and constructing buildings on it. That of course is fantastic. There was an idea that over a period of years—it might be 50 or even 100 years—buildings would be constructed in that locality in accordance with plans prepared now, buildings being acquired only as they became available or if other developments made it desirable to proceed with their acquisition. That plan to construct Government offices in the general area of Merrion Square came in conflict with a project for the erection of a Catholic cathedral. An option on Merrion Square had been acquired by the Archbishop of Dublin and it became known that it was intended to build the contemplated Dublin cathedral in the square. That development naturally again brought up the question of whether the original plan for developing Government buildings in that locality should be adhered to or not and in the course of subsequent discussions alternative plans were being considered. Various sites in the vicinity of Dublin, St. Anne's and the south side, were examined as well as other possible areas in the city which were marked for slum clearance purposes. There was, I think, a tentative decision ultimately in favour of planning for development in the Phoenix Park locality although nothing in the nature of even a sketch plan was made.
It is possible of course to misrepresent the consideration of these matters as preoccupation with extravagant plans but it seems to me that at some stage there must be consideration by some Government in consultation of course with possible alternative Governments as to a long term plan for the construction of Government buildings here. That was done in other countries and there is no reason why it should not be done here. Haphazard construction of Government offices in different parts of the city as the need arises appears to me to be very undesirable. I do not know if we are back on the basis of the original Merrion Square idea or what has happened to the project of constructing a cathedral there.
It may be possible now to get some general inter-Party discussions upon these matters with a view to working out some plan, but if the suggestion comes from the present Government I will assure them that we will not accuse them of intending to carry out works of that character with such speed that all other construction will have to stop and that existing factories and hospitals will have to be pulled down. Nobody believes that nonsense. If there is a decision to develop Government buildings in the Merrion Square area we should get an over all plan so that as the years roll by construction work can be regulated and if a decison is made in favour of some other locality a draft plan should be prepared. In my view it is utterly undesirable and thoroughly bad precedent for the Minister to come into the Dáil and read to the Dáil minutes circulated to the Cabinet by individual members of a previous Government in relation to a matter under consideration by that Government and expressing a view which was held by that Minister alone, which was not in conformity with the ultimate decision taken by the Government, for the purpose of creating subsequent misunderstanding. That precedent has been established by the present Government. Such minutes have been read, in relation to this very matter we are discussing, and other matters, in the Dáil and Seanad, particularly by the Minister for Finance. I hope it will be departed from because if on every occasion there is a change of Government there is a likelihood that the practice will be continued, then, of course, no individual Minister will submit even to his own colleagues in his own Government frank views in writing upon any matter under consideration, as he will always have to bear in mind the possibility of those views being read out to the Dáil by his successor.
We are now considering a proposal to invest a substantial sum of money in what will become a new Government building. It is in an area in which no other Government, building exists, an area which, in my view, is completely unsuitable for Government offices, as it is in the centre of some of the main traffic arteries of the city. The building, in fact, is going to be on an island site, with traffic moving with considerable density and speed all round it. I could not imagine a more unsuitable site for a Government office. I am not going to comment on its suitability as a bus depot, but from the point of view of an office to accommodate 1,000 or more clerical officers and other Government workers, it will be most unsuitably located. If there is to be a substantial investment in new Government buildings, surely it should be in the general area where other Government buildings exist, even if we cannot get it done in accordance with some general and agreed plan to which successive Governments will adhere.
The Minister is representing the Store Street plan as originally being in the form of a project to erect a single storey building as a bus garage and then that other floors were added by a series of succeeding decisions. That is completely without foundation. Not merely is it unfair to former directors and officers of Córas Iompair Éireann, but it is very unfair to the architect. The building as constructed is the building as originally planned. It was planned in its present form. There was no alteration to the plan from the day upon which construction work began till it ceased. It is completely inaccurate to represent Córas Iompair Éireann as in the position of being anxious to sell the building. Córas Iompair Éireann is not anxious to sell the building. Córas Iompair Éireann, it is true, could not proceed with the completion of the building unless the Government were prepared to authorise the raising of funds. But it would cost Córas Iompair Éireann far less money to complete that building as a central bus station than to build a new central bus station in Smithfield. It could get money to complete that building in the same way and in no other way that it can get money for the erection of the proposed Smithfield station. If the argument in favour of the disposal of this building by Córas Iompair Éireann is that they are short of money, then we must assume that it represents a decision that there will not be a bus station in Dublin at all.
When Córas Iompair Éireann was founded by legislation in 1944, I told the board that one of the most urgent duties was to arrange for the construction in Dublin of a suitably equipped central bus station. I think it is a shame that the capital city has not got a suitable bus terminus. I feel humiliated on every occasion I have to travel down the quay and see the crowds of people waiting there without shelter, without any facilities or amenities, for the long-distance bus services. If there is to be a bus station in Dublin, surely the most obvious place to put it is where it has been built. Whether Córas Iompair Éireann was wise or not in deciding to go on with that, they went on with it. There is a bus station there now and it is far more suitable for use as a bus station than it will ever be for use as Government offices.
It has been argued here that the Minister, as Minister for Social Welfare, considering the utilisation of the funds entrusted to him under the national health, unemployment and widows' and orphans' pensions scheme, should not be concerned with these matters, that he should solely be concerned with the proper utilisation of these funds. Will he tell the Dáil that he could not get more suitable offices constructed for his Department for less money than he would have to pay to acquire the Córas Iompair Éireann bus station? He could not tell the Dáil that. He knows quite well that he can get suitable offices constructed, and constructed in less time, for less money than he is proposing to spend on the acquisition of Store Street. He cannot, therefore, defend the acquisition of Store Street on any ground related to the administration of his Department.
If he is trying to justify it on the ground that Córas Iompair Éireann wants to get rid of the site, I say that is not true. I say it is not true even if one has regard to the present board of Córas Iompair Éireann. I say that the present chairman appointed by the present Government is in this position, that he would willingly take the bus terminus at Store Street and use it as a bus terminus if he could get the sanction of the Government. I say it is not the position that Córas Iompair Éireann are hawking that building around looking for someone to buy it. I say that, if it is the position, Córas Iompair Éireann should be at least allowed the opportunity of putting it up for tender and I am quite certain that, if it were put up for tender, they would have little difficulty in disposing of it. I know they prefer to keep it and it is utterly unfair to them to represent them in this position of having a building that they do not want and coming to the Tánaiste to do them the favour of taking the building off their hands.
In any case, what is the position concerning the building? Who is going to convert it? Who is going to adapt that building into offices for the Department of Social Welfare? Is it going to be bought from Córas Iompair Éireann in its present condition? The Minister, when I questioned him in the Dáil on that matter before, said it was. Who is going to pay for plans for converting it into offices for the Department of Social Welfare? Has the preparation of the plans for that conversion been put in hand? Who is employing the architects? Who is paying the architects? Does not everybody in the House know that the picture which the Minister has just given is completely false? Córas Iompair Éireann has been told that the building is to be handed over to this Department, that they are to undertake the cost of planning the conversion in consultation with the Department, that they are to carry out the conversion and that when the building is ready, or as ready as it can be made for occupation by this Department, they are to hand it over and they will then be told how much they are going to get for it. That is the true picture, the picture as confirmed to me by the very evasive replies given by the Minister for Social Welfare to a series of Dáil questions which I addressed to him on the subject. If that is the true picture, why represent it otherwise? Córas Iompair Éireann has been ordered to hand over this building, ordered to hand it over because it was part of the pre-election propaganda of the Coalition Parties that the building should not have been built. It is an unsuitable building for the Department of Social Welfare. They could get a far more suitable one for less money. They are deliberately wasting the funds of the National Health Insurance Society and the unemployment and the widows' and orphans' pensions funds by purchasing that building, at a cost far in excess of the cost of providing more suitable accommodation, solely to justify their own political propaganda.
Now if they come here to the Dáil and say that is the position, we will at least recognise the sincerity of their motives, but these attempts to misrepresent facts, leading the Dáil into the belief that they are doing something that represents good business for the National Health Insurance Society and good business for Córas Iompair Éireann, is just childish. On any ground, from the point of view of the intelligent planning and construction of Government buildings, the provision in Dublin of an urgently needed omnibus station, the provision of a proper headquarters for the Department of Social Welfare, the economic utilisation of the funds entrusted to the Minister, the decision which he has made cannot be justified and he should, I think, recognise that fact in all honesty and accept the amendment.
