Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 25 Nov 1954

Vol. 147 No. 8

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Employment in Berehaven.

asked the Minister for Finance whether he is aware of the exceptional difficulties which prevail in the Berehaven Peninsula, County Cork, in regard to the provision of suitable employment for the local people, and, if so, if he will consider allocating full cost grants for all works in that area approved by him for execution.

Grants amounting to £10,914 have been sanctioned from the Employment and Emergency Schemes Vote in the current financial year for works in the Berehaven peninsula. These represent the full proportionate allocation of funds for the area. In accordance with normal practice full cost grants are made for minor employment schemes and for bog development schemes and I am not aware of any circumstances which would justify waiving the local contributions in other cases.

Is the Minister aware that during the past 12 months applicants for consideration of appropriate works under the bog development schemes and minor employment schemes which carry full cost grant have been informed that these works will be considered only on a contributory basis under the rural improvements schemes. Is he further aware that position obtains despite the fact that there is a higher percentage of unemployment in the peninsula than in any other district in the country? We were informed all these works would carry full cost grants but the office has departed for some time from that principle and now these applications are only considered on a contributory basis.

That is not so. There was an issue of £4,900 for that area for rural improvements. For bog development schemes, a sum of £835 was given.

The position is that these schemes are not even inspected. The people are informed——

The Deputy is making a speech.

I am not. I am asking a question.

The Deputy is not.

I am telling the Parliamentary Secretary—I am asking him——

The Deputy is giving information, not asking for information. A question should ask for information, not give it.

I am asking the Parliamentary Secretary whether he is aware that these applications are not even examined until the parties concerned consent to contribute a portion of the cost of the proposed works and whether he considers that that is right and natural.

It is natural enough. The Act says that the beneficiaries under a rural improvements scheme are to contribute sometimes 25 per cent. or sometimes, again, there might be as much as a 95 per cent. grant. Before we start the work, they are asked if they are willing to contribute. If they tell us that they are not willing to contribute, that is the end of it.

The Parliamentary Secretary is not answering the question which I am asking.

Question No. 28.

With respect to the Chair, I believe that you are not giving me an opportunity——

Question No. 28, in the name of Deputy Killilea.

——of eliciting information from the Parliamentary Secretary. Were it not for the fact that I troubled the House on the Adjournment last night, I——

Question No. 28.

Top
Share