asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he is aware that in the Dublin county borough the scheme for the distribution of fuel to necessitous and low-income householders comes to an end on the 21st March, 1954; and if, in view of the continuous hardships being borne by the recipients through the high cost of fuel and other necessaries of life, he will order the withdrawal of the notices ending the scheme.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Dublin County Borough Fuel Scheme.
The winter cheap fuel scheme has always terminated not later than the 31st March in each year and I am not prepared to agree to its continuance after that date.
This scheme, in so far as it applies to Dublin, is chiefly used by old age pensioners and people in the lower income group, at least 90 per cent. of whom are entirely dependent on this fuel as a means of cooking. They have to boil a kettle in April and May just as in January and December. Great hardship would be inflicted on them and I would earnestly ask the Minister to reconsider the matter with a view to making this grant available.
I do not know whether I should accept the Deputy's statement that the old age pensioners and lower income group are entirely dependent on this summer scheme, or not.
For cooking.
If it is true, the total of people in the lower income group in Dublin is under 8,000 families because that is all who accepted the scheme the last year it was running—1952.
If only 8,000 people use the scheme surely the cost of keeping the scheme in operations would not be very great.
It would not.
Would the Minister not then consider that it would be advisable to keep on the scheme in view of the small cost involved?
The summer scheme was running from 1944, but from 1947, after the war, to 1951, the number who availed of the summer scheme was reduced from 29,300 to 7,900. The number was dwindling each year until it came to a point where the cost of administration was out of all proportion to the benefits conferred.
Will the Minister withdraw the allegation made by his colleagues that this turf was used last year at the by-election to pelt the Fianna Fáil candidate?
The scheme was not in operation last year.
May I understand, therefore, that the Minister withdraws the charge made by his colleague to that effect?
I am not going to accept the Deputy as the interpreter of what a Minister says.
The Deputy was pelted out of Dublin.
He was.
All the pelting is not over yet on that account.