Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 7 Nov 1952

Vol. 134 No. 9

Private Deputies' Business. - Local Government Bill, 1952—Second Stage (Resumed).

Mr. Beirne

When I reported progress on this Bill last Wednesday evening I was saying that it would be a reasonably good gamble for any individual to bet on its success or failure. I knew in my heart that the Minister would come along with some plausible offer and say that he accepts the principle of the Bill. I did not believe that the Minister would accept the Private Deputies' Bill as it stood.

I am delighted to learn that the Minister's sympathies lie in the direction of doing something for the repair of the roads mentioned in this Bill. I am not, however, satisfied yet that the Minister will go far enough. We have not heard what his intentions are. They may be good but I am at sea in regard to what type of Bill the Minister may bring in here. If he brings in a Bill containing the words "public utility", such as are in this Bill, then I say that it will not be worth the paper on which it is written. To my mind, the expression "public utility" has never been properly interpreted. I have my own interpretation of this expression, other Deputies may have their interpretation of the expression——

Mr. Dillon

And Chief Baron Palles had a third one.

Mr. Beirne

It is too bad that we are perpetuating his memory in this country.

Mr. Dillon

He was a very decent man and he was born in this country.

Mr. Beirne

And an administrative British officer. My interpretation of the expression "public utility" can be found in a motion which I moved in this House on the 8th February, 1946, and which was seconded by Deputy Cogan. The motion read as follows:

"That Dáil Éireann is of opinion that Section 25 of the Local Government Act, 1925, be amended to empower local authorities to repair and maintain from local funds any road which ordinarily is of service to two or more tenants."

In framing that motion, I did not include the expression "public utility"; I did not mention any specific number of householders; I referred to a road which is ordinarily of service to two or more tenants. I did not specify any number of houses. In his Bill, Deputy McQuillan specified eight or ten houses but afterwards made a change. I believe that any cul-de-sac road which serves people, whether they reside there or not, should be repaired by the county council. I know quite a number of those roads. Sometimes they are two or three miles long and farmers live there. I know of several small farmers who, though they do not live on such roads, own small patches of land there. Very often they have great difficulty in removing their tillage and produce from these patches of land because of the condition of the road leading to it. Therefore, even if there are no householders living along such a road, if it is ordinarily of service to two or more persons I think it should be kept in a proper condition.

The Minister is aware that we have had a grievance in Roscommon for many years. I have been associated as far as I possibly could in every move for the betterment of the types of roads in question. I am glad that Deputy McQuillan is taking as keen an interest in these matters as I am. This Bill has been supported by Deputy Finan. It was introduced by Deputy McQuillan and, of course, I support it also. We are three of the Roscommon Deputies. The Minister for Justice, the remaining Roscommon Deputy, who has, so far, been conspicuous by his absence from this debate, will, I hope, come in and tell the House his views on this matter and make it clear that he knows something about what is taking place in Roscommon.

When development work takes place in cities and towns, roads are built and everything is put in proper order but when it comes to the improvement of conditions in rural Ireland we cannot afford to spend even one shilling on the improvement of roads there. I have visited many such roads in rural Ireland and I realise only too well that the people who live along them are existing under intolerable conditions. I am not surprised that there is a flight from the land. I cannot see how the present generation or future generations will be content to reside along cul-de-sac roads and by-roads in rural Ireland unless they are put into a proper condition of repair. An appeal has been made to farmers to increase production, to go in for more tillage, and so forth. How can anybody expect a small farmer whose farm is situated perhaps two miles from a main or a county road, and whose only access to it is a by-road or a cul-de-sac which is in such a bad state of repair that when he walks along it he is up to his ankles in slush and muck, to put his shoulder to the wheel in an endeavour to produce more food? If he has a grain crop he cannot get any machinery into his farm and he has great difficulty in getting the crop out.

I am glad to learn that the Minister's attitude to this matter is sympathetic but I should like him to translate that sympathy into some practical step to remedy the matter. He should tell us what he intends to do. The people of Roscommon have always been interested in this matter and I can assure the Minister that our interest is even keener now than ever it was. In my time I have been a member of the Roscommon County Council and also chairman. Let there be no uneasiness about the desire of the county council in regard to these roads. This year, each county council was asked to submit details of about two miles of these roads which were considered in need of repair. That was done. Every one of the county councils submitted details.

Mr. Dillon

Does that amount to 52 miles of additional roads?

Mr. Beirne

Yes, exactly 52.5 miles of additional roads. The estimated expenditure on these two miles of roads is something in the neighbourhood of £4,000 or, in other words, roughly about 3½d. in the £ on the rates. That was one year's programme. The next year's programme would cover a further 52 miles of roads, and so on, until the problem was solved, to a great extent at any rate.

Mr. Dillon

Can the Deputy give any suggestion of the cost of the annual maintenance of these new miles of roads?

Mr. Beirne

I have not the figures, but I can say that it would be negligible. In some cases there are only two families concerned and in other cases five or six families so, as a matter of fact, there would not be any such thing as annual maintenance on these roads for a considerable number of years. If they were looked after every three, four or five years it would be quite sufficient to keep them in proper order.

The motion which I moved in 1946, and which was seconded by Deputy Cogan, got a very mixed reception in this House. I am glad to see that this Bill which was introduced by Deputy McQuillan and which is supported by Deputy Finan, by myself and by some other Deputies, is getting a different reception.

What was the reason for the change of heart that took place? It was an extraordinary thing that in 1946 the motion got a rather bad reception, but in 1952 things have changed very much. I am not going to say how that change has come about, but, to be honest about it, I realise, and I am sure the Government and the Minister realise, that Fianna Fáil is not the powerful instrument it was in 1946 and that the axe is hanging over their heads. They have got to accept this Bill; they dare not refuse to accept it. If they refused to accept it and put it to a vote of the House, the Government would be defeated. They are, therefore, adopting the line of least resistance in saying that they are ready to accept the Bill. That is a bit of a surrender from the days of 1946 when they would not hear a proposal of this kind at all.

Can the Minister tell me if there is anything wrong—I should be delighted to hear if there is—in the local authority providing the contribution which is necessary in the case of a rural improvements scheme and taking it out of a private individual's hands? Is there anything wrong in that? That has been the case in Roscommon County Council, on a few occasions, when a rural improvements scheme was suggested for repair of the roads which might have cost £50, £60 or £100. Perhaps the local applicant and his friends might be responsible for a 75 per cent. contribution in that case. If that was taken out of the individual's hands and passed over to the county council, allowing the county council to make the 75 per cent. contribution, is there anything wrong in it? For the life of me, I cannot see that there is. Speaking on behalf of the members of the county council, I can say that we are prepared, in cases such as that, where a rural improvements scheme is to be adopted to meet the needs of the people, to contribute, say, one-fourth or up to 90 or 95 per cent. of the cost, so as to have the work carried out for the benefit of the individuals who make the application.

To show the sincerity of my Party and of myself in this matter, ex-Deputy Commons and myself introduced a motion on 23rd November, 1949, suggesting that the Minister should increase the grants under rural improvements schemes. I am grateful and happy to say that the grants were considerably increased by the then Parliamentary Secretary, Deputy Donnellan.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister for Local Government is not responsible for rural improvements schemes.

Mr. Beirne

I am only suggesting that this is a matter which affects by-roads and cul-de-sac roads very much and I do not think I can be irrelevant in what I have to say because Deputy Allen mentioned this particular matter and he brought in the Official Debates.

Mr. Killilea

To correct a misrepresentation.

Mr. Beirne

He dealt with it more exhaustively than I intend to. However, I am grateful for anything that has been done in this matter. The contribution under the rural improvements scheme was stepped up by Deputy Donnellan as Parliamentary Secretary from 75 per cent. to 95 per cent. It was a very generous contribution and I am very proud that it was done by a member of our Party.

Having said so much and having heard the Minister's offer here the other night to consider this Bill and to bring in some legislation, perhaps in the early spring, I am wondering whether it is not a waste of time to consider it further or whether those who have already spoken on the Bill have not been wasting the time of the House. I wonder what Deputy McQuillan feels about it? If I were satisfied that Deputy McQuillan were prepared to accept the offer of the Minister, I would save myself a lot of trouble but I wonder what Deputy McQuillan's attitude is? I should not like to see him withdraw this Bill and I think he is not such a fool as to buy a pig in a poke. My advice to him is not to withdraw it.

Minister for Local Government (Mr. Smith)

If he is prepared to take it as it is, I shall give it to him.

Mr. Beirne

This Bill will be subject to amendment at a later stage.

Mr. Smith

If you have any doubt that he should withdraw it on my undertaking to introduce something to meet the principle of the Bill, you can have it just as it is.

Mr. Beirne

In my opening remarks I said that I refused and that my Party will refuse, to accept the Bill as it stands and that we hoped to have an opportunity of putting in amendments at a later stage.

Mr. Smith

I only said that the attitude here appears to be that when you get what you want, you say you do not want it.

Mr. Beirne

Anything we got, we got from Deputy Donnellan. That is all we got.

Mr. Smith

It is not a question of what you got but what I am giving. You told Deputy McQuillan not to withdraw the Bill. If Deputy McQuillan does not withdraw it, he can have it as it is.

Mr. Beirne

I ask that the Minister should be more definite in what he is giving.

Mr. Smith

I am giving you the Bill if you want it.

Mr. Beirne

No, I will not accept the Bill. I said at the outset that I would not accept the Bill unless it was amended.

Mr. Smith

Did you ever hear the story of the mouse in the buttermilk?

Mr. Dillon

There is a Fianna Fáil mouse in it.

Mr. Smith

This is not a Fianna Fáil Bill.

Mr. Dillon

But the mouse in it is the Fianna Fáil contribution.

Mr. Beirne

I do not like a milk and water settlement of this matter. I am greatly afraid there is a mouse in the milk and that there is no cream on it.

Mr. Smith

I am giving you this Bill, if you want it as it is.

Mr. Beirne

I do not want the Bill as it is, but I want the Bill with amendments. I am sure you are intelligent enough to know what that means. I support the principle of the Bill but I want the Bill amended. You want to put the mouse in the buttermilk.

Mr. Smith

I shall tell you the story if you wish.

Mr. Sweetman

It is a pity there are so few here to hear about the mouse in the buttermilk.

Mr. Smith

I shall tell you the whole story.

Mr. Dillon

Gather the boys in to hear it. Ring the bell.

Notice taken that 20 Deputies were not present; House counted and 20 Deputies being present,

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Beirne.

Mr. Dillon

I thought the Minister was going to tell us a story.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Beirne is in possession.

Mr. Beirne

I want to be quite clear about the Bill.

Mr. Killilea

Hear, hear!

Mr. Beirne

Anything Deputy Killilea says is just as clear as mud. He should never intervene at all. I am prepared and my Party is prepared to accept the principle of this Bill with amendments. That is pretty definite. Neither I nor my Party can accept the Bill as it stands. We have always supported the principle of the repair of by-roads and culs-de-sac in this country and shall always continue to do so. I should like to know what Deputy McQuillan's intentions are. Does he intend to withdraw the Bill? I have advised him before that he has got no definite promise. Nothing has been offered to him, so that I would advise him to go ahead with the Bill. At a later stage, amendments from this Party will be put into the Bill.

Mr. Killilea

It is very hard to understand the attitude of certain of the Opposition regarding this Bill of Deputy McQuillan's. All of us are interested in the type of road that will be covered by the Bill. It is quite evident that the Clann na Talmhan people, particularly in Roscommon, are very annoyed because Deputy McQuillan has stolen their thunder. They want the principle of the Bill. The Minister has offered them that, and has offered to bring in a Bill to cover all the matters that Deputy McQuillan wants covered. Yet, they are not satisfied. Listening to a number of the speeches which have been made, it was evident that there was not a lot of enthusiasm behind them other than political tactics. So far as the roads under discussion are concerned, neither this Bill nor any legislation was required, because an enormous amount of this work in Galway, Roscommon and other western counties and probably in every county, could, under the present legislation, be done by the county councils.

You have these public utility roads leading from one public road to another. You have them in Roscommon. I am sure there are thousands of miles of such roads in County Galway. They have not been made in County Galway, nor can the Galway County Council make them, and seemingly no effort is being made in County Roscommon to make them. So far as the attitude of Clann na Talmhan is concerned regarding roads in County Roscommon, I think they have the most discreditable record of road making in Ireland. It was the county which, a few years ago, refused to strike a rate for the making of roads.

Mr. Finan

That is not so. The county council never refused to strike a rate for the making of a main road.

Mr. Killilea

As regards the main roads, or any other roads, you struck a wallop at the road workers when you put them out of employment and cut down the grants. You had to be forced to make your roads. That seems to be the attitude of Clann na Talmhan.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy should deal with the Bill that is before the House.

Mr. Finan

I do not think it is right to misrepresent the matter like that. In the interests of truth, I want to say that the Roscommon County Council never suggested a reduction in the estimate or in any expenditure on county roads. They were concerned mainly with the main roads.

Mr. Killilea

I am talking about roads in general, and of the attitude of the Roscommon County Council. We have thousands of miles of roads that could be made, but they are not being made.

Mr. Beirne

Do you say that you want them made?

Mr. Killilea

I say this, that if I go back to Roscommon in ten years' time, and if Deputy Beirne is chairman of the Roscommon County Council, I am sure I will find an awful lot of roads in the County Roscommon that will not be made. That will not be Deputy McQuillan's fault. There are thousands of miles of roads in the country which the county councils could make, and the reason they are not making them is this: In my county, at any rate, we used to strike the rate for something like £15,000 for new works. We arrived at the stage when that sum of money was found to be of very little use because the amount of work that it would do would not be noticed, due to the fact that the cost of materials, wages and all the rest, so far as the county council was concerned, had gone to such a point that we would have to strike a rate or at least make three or four times the amount of money, that formerly was spent, available before we could do any useful work. For the last few years, we have been unable to make any money available for that particular type of work.

I want to say that I welcome this proposal. We have always been favourable towards the construction and improvement of roads over the country. That has been the policy of Fianna Fáil all the time. Let there be no misunderstanding about that. I listened to Deputy Beirne, and other Deputies, tell us about the rural improvements schemes and say that Fianna Fáil had made 75 per cent. available for them. That is not the case. Long before the inter-Party Government came into power, Fianna Fáil had made 100 per cent. available for such roads. When these roads were finished under the rural improvements schemes they were taken over by the county council and are to-day county roads. What those Deputies have said about the improvements done under the rural improvements schemes was only eyewash.

It was interesting to hear Deputy Donnellan the other night slating the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance. It is well known to everyone that a motion was tabled in this House by two members of the Coalition Government away back in 1949, and that the statement that was made on it by the then Parliamentary Secretary was a bit of eyewash. The two Deputies attempted to withdraw the motion, but Deputy Beegan forced the motion and forced the then Parliamentary Secretary to bring in what he believed was a bit of an improvement on the previous position, although it did not do all the things that we were told it would do. The Parliamentary Secretary led everyone to believe that he would not be two years in office until every road in County Galway would be made, and I suppose he gave the same promise in Roscommon. The roads are still there and they are not made.

If this Bill goes through, the county councils will be faced with a very heavy burden. I doubt if they will be able to undertake it. We have an unfortunate position which arises from the policy of the Land Commission over all the years of making roads ten or 12 feet wide. If, under this Bill, the reconstruction of these roads is undertaken, fences will have to be removed and the work will have to be started from the foundation. That will be a very expensive item. I welcome this Bill and the Minister's attitude to it. I think that the Clann na Talmhan Party should not be hedging in their attitude towards it. The Minister has made an offer to accept the principle of the Bill.

Mr. Dillon

And the Bill itself.

Mr. Killilea

Yes. He has made an offer to accept the Bill if Deputy McQuillan wants it. He has offered to bring in legislation covering everything in the Bill and perhaps a little more. I wonder what greater offer could be made by any Minister. The Opposition should make up their minds one way or the other. They cannot have it both ways. Deputy McQuillan would be well advised to accept the Minister's offer. It is the usual thing when Private Members' Bills are brought in. It is usual with regard to this Government. I do not want to say that those were the tactics of the previous Government. Their Deputies brought in Private Members' Bills, for example the Agricultural Workers' Half-Holiday Bill, and the Coalition Government could not make up their minds about it one way or another and the Bill was a flop.

Mr. Hickey

This is wasting the time of the House.

Mr. Killilea

Then our Minister for Agriculture had to bring in a new Bill and do the thing properly. Surely Deputy McQuillan has learned from that the lesson that it would be better to let somebody else handle this? He has brought the matter to the attention of the House but he would be well advised to let the Minister handle the rest of the job. The Deputy has done his job and done it well and the Minister will be able to put the finishing touches to it. He has been acquainted with local authorities for a long time and has particular experience of this type of work. I am satisfied that he is prepared to help local authorities to do this type of work in their own way.

A lot of play has been made here about roads of general public utility. The Minister said the other night that he was prepared to let local authorities decide for themselves what could be termed roads of general public utility. If a local authority cannot decide that, surely the Minister or the officials of any Department cannot put it down in black and white for them. This is something that must be decided by a local authority and the Minister was perfectly right when he said that. It was a reasonable explanation of his attitude and must be accepted by us all. I welcome the Bill and I hope that the Opposition will make up their minds and will not run with the hare and chase with the hounds until they kill it.

Mr. Donnellan

Do not worry too much about that.

Mr. McQuillan

The Minister is to be congratulated on the manner in which he has approached this measure. I understand that he is willing to accept the Bill as it was brought before the House. I say, without any disrespect to the Minister or allowing a different interpretation to be put on his remarks, that I would like if he would accept the Bill as I have it here before the House.

Mr. Dillon

Hear, hear!

Mr. McQuillan

His decision to accept it means that he has done two very important things: first, he has brought fresh hope to thousands of families who live in rural areas on these neglected cul-de-sac roads; secondly—this is a very important point to remember—he will restore some of the prestige and status of local authorities, the prestige and status that was stripped from them by the managerial Act. I was very pleased indeed to hear him state the other night his belief that local authorities throughout the country were on the whole responsible people and that he was confident, that they would not misuse the power given to them by this measure. I think the members of local authorities throughout the country should note with appreciation the Minister's views on that point. It is a step in the right direction and local authorities may in future get back more of the power which was rightly theirs but which was stripped from them by the managerial Act.

There is no question at all in my mind that local authorities are the best bodies to decide what local roads should be repaired. Nobody is in a better position than the local councillor to know what roads are of general public utility and what roads serve the people in the various areas. It is time that that power was given to those responsible bodies in order that the necessary work should be carried out throughout the country.

I am afraid I cannot understand the attitude of some members towards the Bill. I will have to put down their remarks to a lack of knowledge of what the Bill really contains. I do not like to suggest that they would in any way hinder its passage but I am afraid that they have shown a complete lack of knowledge of what is contained in the measure. Some Deputies have mentioned the question of general public utility. Personally I think that the question is covered very fully in Section 2 of this Bill and if there are Deputies who are dissatisfied it is open to them to submit suitable amendments. It is stated in the section that if such road authority— meaning local authority—is satisfied that the road is of general public utility—that means that the local authority is entitled to decide what general public utility is—they have power to declare that particular road to be of general public utility and, as a result of that declaration, to spend money on it. The Bill is simply an enabling measure and does not mean that every council in Ireland will take immediate advantage of its provisions. There is no question in the measure of deciding how many families must live on a cul-de-sac road. That can be decided by the local authorities. That is the power now being given to them under the measure. If local authorities feel like it they can ignore the Bill completely.

Another important thing has come to light in the course of this debate. I know for a fact from my experience during the period I supported the inter-Party Government and since that many councillors like to shelter behind the provisions of the 1925 Act whereby local authorities have not the power to repair these cul-de-sac roads. In other words, quite a number of county councillors will tell people throughout their localities: "We would do these roads if we had the power, but the Minister of the day is responsible and he will not give us power." This Bill will now show the sincerity or otherwise of these particular councillors, because they will now have power to decide whether or not certain roads should be repaired and the people will be soon able to judge their sincerity or otherwise with regard to improving conditions in their localities.

There is an urgency about this measure so far as County Roscommon is concerned. One of the reasons which prompted me to introduce it was that Roscommon County Council has been repairing and maintaining approximately 140 miles of cul-de-sac roads since as far back at 1900. In 1947 the council was surcharged £2,700 for repairing these roads, although the council had practically repaired them on a three-year basis since 1900. Nothing has been done with these roads since 1947, and they have been left in a deplorable condition. I should like to see this Bill passed as quickly as possible so that the Roscommon County Council will be enabled this year to do a very necessary work by repairing those roads. That is one of the reasons why I ask the Minister to accept the Bill, as I believe there is great urgency for it. With regard to the Deputies who are worried about provisions in the Bill, they will have their opportunity to put forward suitable amendments if they so desire.

Question put and agreed to.