Vol. 122 No. 7
I move:—
That a sum not exceeding £150,440 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending the 31st day of March, 1951, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of Public Works (1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 33, secs. 5 and 6; 5 & 6 Vict., c. 89, secs. 1 and 2; 9 & 10 Vict., c. 86, secs. 2, 7 and 9; etc.)
Following the practice in previous years, I propose to take Votes 8 and 9 together.
Vote 8 bears the salaries and expenses of the administrative, executive and technical staffs of the Office of Public Works, which is the office responsible for the administration of Vote 9.
Vote 9 provides the necessary funds for the purchase of sites and buildings for State purposes, for the erection, maintenance and furnishing of the Government offices and other State-owned premises throughout the country, for arterial drainage and other engineering works, for the erection and improvement of national schools, for the erection of major military buildings, for the maintenance of State-owned parks and State harbours, and for a number of minor activities.
The amount required for this Vote shows an increase of £24,540 on the Vote for 1949-50 due to an increase of £28,593 in gross expenditure offset partly by an increase of £4,053 in estimated Appropriations-in-Aid. Of the additional estimated expenditure the greater part, £19,493, on sub-head A— salaries, wages and allowances due mainly to an increase of £12,000 in the provision for additional engineering staff required for the expanding programme of drainage, marine and other engineering works, and also to increases in the staff of the secretary's branch. Under sub-head B there is an increase of £8,500 to meet travelling expenses of the additional engineering staff and to provide for the increased architectural activity required by the enlarged programme of new works, mainly, schools.
An increase in estimated Appropriations-in-Aid is mainly in respect of recoupments from the Vote for Public Works and Buildings of the salaries and expenses of engineers employed on arterial drainage construction works and recoupment from the Vote for Transport and Marine Services of similar expenditure in connection with harbour improvement works.
The Estimate for Public Works and Buildings shows a net increase of £781,280 on the amount voted for 1949-50. There are increases under most sub-heads, the largest being in those relating to new works, arterial drainage and the purchase and maintenance of engineering plant and machinery, including the requirements of the central engineering workshop. The provisions for the purchase of sites and buildings and for rents and rates are also increased.
It will be observed that the customary detailed lay-out of Part III of this sub-head has been changed in favour of a more simple lay-out, designed to show more clearly the estimated total expenditure on behalf of each Department. If any Deputy would wish to have information as to the more important projects covered by these provisions I will be happy to supply it.
The expenditure last year on new works, alterations and additions, for which £840,000 was provided in the original and Supplementary Estimates, amounted to £807,000 approximately. This was a considerable increase on the previous year's expenditure of approximately £496,000 due in great measure to the progress made possible by exceptionally favourable weather conditions, the easier supply of building materials, and also to some large unforeseen works. Of the total expenditure about £514,000 was incurred on grants for the building and improvement of national schools compared with £308,000 approximately for that service in the previous year. For 1950-51 we are proposing to provide for a net expenditure on new works at £1,166,000.
The increase of £326,000 over the £840,000 voted last year includes an additional provision of £220,000 for national schools grants on which £700,000 is expected to be spent in 1950-51.
The net provision for arterial drainage construction works is £231,000, i.e., an increase of £95,000 on the amount voted last year, which reflects the development of the arterial drainage programme. Of this additional provision £22,000 is for extension of the Brosna catchment scheme which this year will employ more personnel and machines, and £53,000 is for the opening up of the Glyde and Dee catchment on which full-scale work has now started. The gross cost of the latter scheme will be of the order of £920,000. The preparation of a scheme for the drainage of the Feale catchment is well in hands and in anticipation of the commencement of operations before the close of the financial year a provision of £20,000 has been included. A firm estimate of the cost of this scheme is not yet available.
This year also it is intended to put in hand the final stage of the works at Clarecastle in respect of which a statutory undertaking was given in the Consent which formed the basis of the District of Fergus Drainage Act, 1943. The work proposed comprises the provision of automatic tidal sluices at Clarecastle Bridge and the removal of a rock shoal in the vicinity. It is expected that £14,800, representing about half the total estimated cost, will be expended in 1950-51. The undertaking of Hydrometric and Arterial Drainage Surveys (sub-head J (1)) will be expanded this year and an additional £5,000 is provided for wages, stores and materials.
The amounts required under the K sub-heads for the purchase and maintenance of engineering plant and machinery show substantial increases, also reflecting the expansion already referred to in the programme for arterial drainage construction works, as well as for dredging and other engineering operations; of the provision of £395,000 for purchases (sub-head K (1) ) the sum of £126,000 is for the completion of a new dredging unit. For these purposes and in order to provide for a number of purchases which could not be completed last year the sum required for sub-head K (1) shows an increase of £197,000 on that voted for 1949-50.
Maintenance of plant and machinery (sub-head K (2)) which last year was adversely affected by lack of accommodation, calls for an increased provision of £13,290 owing to the enlarged fleet of machines and the overhauls now falling due on the machines which have been engaged on the Brosna drainage scheme.
The increase of £47,500 in the provision for the central engineering workshop—sub-head K (3) is mainly attributable to the cost of plant required for the equipment of the proposed new central engineering workshop and stores. The total provisions for drainage and machinery add up to no less a sum than £776,900—an increase of £371,390 over 1949-50.
There is an increase of £75,000 under sub-head A—purchase of sites and buildings. This increase is mainly attributable to the need to acquire this year new accommodation for the High Commissioner in London. The provision for rents, rates, etc.—sub-head E, is increased by £30,000 owing to general rent increases, devaluation, additional legation premises, etc.
The decrease of £16,317 in estimated Appropriations-in-Aid—sub-head L, is due mainly to the inclusion in last year's receipts of a fine of £17,000 paid in respect of a new lease made to the United States Government of the premises in the Phoenix Park.
I move that the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration. I do so because the Government has failed to live up to its promises. One would imagine from the statements made by the people who now occupy the Government Benches that this question of arterial drainage was a simple matter. In fact, a prominent Minister stated some years ago that good work was done in Ireland down the years by man-power alone, and that, long before the advent of drainage machinery, before it was even thought of, very valuable work was done by man-power. He went on to state that in the constituency he represented, in the vicinity of the confluence of the Brosna and the Shannon, sufficient men left the district through emigration over the previous couple of years to drain without machinery that magnificent river, as he described it. We are advancing a little. I notice that the Parliamentary Secretary informs us that, for drainage and machinery this year, he is providing a sum of £776,900. That is a bit of an advance on the part of a Government whose chief spokesman maintained that the drainage of the Shannon could be carried out without machinery.
During the year, a scheme which was prepared before the change of Government was put into force—the second of its kind—but the Parliamentary Secretary has not given any evidence that any rapid progress is being made with further schemes, some of which were already prepared before the change of Government. We have on hands at the moment the Brosna scheme, and the Glyde and Dee scheme was commenced in the course of the year, but, in addition, there was another scheme in the Kerry-West Limerick area which was well under way at the time of the change of Government. If I am wrong, I will accept the Parliamentary Secretary's correction, but I failed to hear him state that that scheme was to be implemented this year. It seems to me that the progress we were led to expect from the criticisms levelled at the previous Government has not been made during the past year and one would like to see more rapid progress made.
We do not hold now, and never did hold, that this question of arterial drainage was very simple. The previous Opposition would lead one to believe that, once the Drainage Act was passed, every river in the country could have been drained overnight, but, as the Parliamentary Secretary now knows, and, I am sure, some of his colleagues are beginning to find out, the preparation of a comprehensive drainage scheme involves a good deal of hard work in advance. The preparation of the Brosna scheme, as the Parliamentary Secretary knows, was begun practically immediately after the passing of the Act and, in fact, steps were being taken in anticipation of the passing of the Act with a view to getting that scheme under way. That took several years.
A scheme of that magnitude at any time will take a good many years to prepare and put into effect, unless the Government are to revert to what was the practice when they were in office of carrying out schemes in a rushed manner without proper consideration and even without consulting the people concerned. They are bound now, according to the 1945 Act, to consult every interest concerned. That may slow up a scheme but will ensure that the mistakes made under previous Acts of 1924 and 1925 will be avoided, that every scheme put through will be a comprehensive scheme and that no haphazard work which would entail the flooding of lands will be carried out.
The engineering portion of the Brosna scheme began in 1942 in anticipation of the passing of the Act and it involved a survey of 530 miles of river and 5,000 acres of land. That was brought to an end in 1944, so that it took two years to prepare the preliminary survey. It took a somewhat similar period to prepare the survey in connection with the Glyde and Dee and the surveys in connection with the Brick and Cashen and Feale in Kerry and West Limerick, which were begun in July, 1945, ended in August, 1946. The Parliamentary Secretary has not told us what works they have under way and what new schemes it is proposed to proceed with during the coming year. The only addition to the schemes under preparation at the time of the change of Government is the Corrib scheme. I failed to catch his observations on that scheme. Perhaps I was not in the House when he did make a reference to it, but we would like to know what progress, if any, has been made with that scheme and whether it is proposed to undertake any further drainage schemes during the current year. Is it possible for the Parliamentary Secretary to announce that any scheme or schemes will be put in hands during the coming year? He cannot now say that machinery is not available because he has shown that hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of machinery has been obtained. He can no longer be held up for lack of machinery.
With regard to the purchase of sites and buildings, I would like some information from the Parliamentary Secretary in reference to sub-head A as to what exactly is involved. The Parliamentary Secretary referred to the provision of some offices in London for the High Commissioner. The amount of the increase under that sub-head is £75,000. Surely it does not cost £75,000 to provide an office or to improve the office which the High Commissioner is occupying at the moment.
For new works, alterations and additions, there is an increase of £326,000. Does that mean new drainage works not contemplated hitherto? There is an increase of £95,000 for arterial drainage construction works. Is that the sum that is to be spent on construction of existing drainage schemes? I am glad to note that the Parliamentary Secretary is making provision here for the completion of the Fergus drainage and the provision of sluice gates at Clarecastle. That is a matter that has been under contemplation for quite a long time but I understand and appreciate the reasons why that has been held up for a number of years. The necessary data had to be obtained. At long last, that scheme will be put into effect and I hope the sluice gates will be provided this year. It will safeguard the town of Ennis from continuous fooding to which it has been subjected in times of spring tides and will also be a protection for the banks which in comparatively recent times have broken down more than once. Whatever money is being expended upon it—I think it is over £14,000—will be well spént and it will save the Board of Works perhaps from having to face a larger bill at some future time.
For the purchase of engineering plant and machinery there is a provision of £395,000. That is a fairly substantial sum. Therefore, I hope that when the Parliamentary Secretary comes to answer for his stewardship next year, he will be able to report more substantial progress than has been possible during the past 12 months.
During my time in this House, on many occasions, I listened to this Estimate being introduced by Deputy Smith when he was Parliamentary Secretary and by Deputy O'Grady. At that time there were great intentions and many plans but very little action. We give credit for the Arterial Drainage Bill, which was introduced in 1944, and which was supported by all Parties in the House, and which was not implemented until the present Government came into power and the present Parliamentary Secretary took over.
In the two and a half years of the office of this Government, the River Brosna drainage scheme was begun and is now nearing completion. Work on the Glyde and Dee catchment area is in operation and, in connection with the Brick-Cashen area in County Kerry, a sum of £20,000 odd is provided this year. Yet, despite all that has been accomplished in a short space of two years and a few months, Deputy O'Grady had the brazenness to tell us he is not satisfied with the progress.
Without wishing at this late hour of the night to introduce political arguments, I want to say that I am very well satisfied with the progress. It seems that the Deputy who has just sat down and his colleagues were awaiting comprehensive schemes. We would all desire comprehensive schemes but it seems that because of the danger of going ahead too fast with comprehensive schemes they just sat down and did not go ahead at all. It was the safest thing and the easiest way out but the result was that drainage problems were left to be dealt with by somebody who was not afraid to go ahead with a comprehensive scheme and to take the consequences thereafter.
I am very pleased to see this year an increase in the amount of money which is allocated for the purpose of machinery, an increase in connection with the repair shop that has been set up for the repair of the said machinery, an increase in respect of the engineering staff which is to carry out surveys of the different rivers and to report back with a view to making comprehensive schemes possible. There is an increase in respect of every single function or matter which pertains to arterial drainage. Yet we hear that sufficient progress is not being made.
I can safely say that, if this rate of progress is maintained, if money is put into drainage as it has been for the past few years, in a reasonable space of time the drainage problems which have been neglected for hundreds of years will be brought to a successful conclusion. Whatever else we may do, nobody in this House can find fault—in fairness to Deputy O'Grady, I am sure he does not find fault—on the ground that money is being spent on this very beneficial work.
In connection with arterial drainage I am very interested to know what hope there is of a survey being carried out on the Corrib catchment area and the Moy catchment area in the province of Connaught. I realise that a priority list was made out some years ago and that the various catchment areas were listed in what was considered the order of merit. We realise that Deputies fought to get their own constituencies looked after first but, in fairness, I must say that I think the schemes were placed on a really straight priority list. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will leave no stone unturned in order to see that work on the Corrib catchment area and the Moy catchment area will be put into operation as soon as it is humanly possible. I am not asking him to perform the miracle of putting these schemes into operation in the coming year but if he can assure us that surveys are in progress or will be in progress and that when the machinery, etc., is ready work will be commenced, I will be satisfied.
When one of the other schemes which must be finished in the very near future, as, for instance, the Brosna, is completed, it should be possible to transfer some of the machinery and engineering staff to this area in the West and thus bring much-needed relief to the small farmers by redeeming land that is so very valuable to them, on the banks of the River Corrib and the Moy. I move to report progress.
