Vol. 156 No. 11
I move:—
That a sum not exceeding £470,700 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1957, for Employment and Emergency Schemes (including Relief of Distress).
Under the Vote for employment and emergency schemes, moneys are provided for the annual programme of employment schemes to give work to men in receipt of unemployment assistance in urban and rural areas of the country, and for other services such as bog development schemes, rural improvements schemes, minor marine and other miscellaneous works. The Vote also makes provision for the salaries, travelling expenses, etc., of the staff of the Special Employment Schemes Office responsible for the administration of the Vote.
The provision, including allocation from the National Development Fund grant, and estimated expenditure in 1955-56 for the various services were as follows. I am also giving particulars of the expenditure in 1954-55 for each service for comparison:—
|
Service |
Total Provision 1955/56 |
Expenditure (Estimated) 1955/56 |
Expenditure (Actual) 1954/55 |
|
|
£ |
£ |
£ |
||
|
A. |
Salaries, travelling and to other incidental expenses. |
85,000 |
80,460 |
76,990 |
|
to |
||||
|
E. |
||||
|
F. |
Urban Employment Schemes |
300,000 |
262,540 |
328,728 |
|
G. |
Rural Employment Schemes |
60,000 |
57,100 |
58,237 |
|
H. |
Minor Employment Schemes |
140,000 |
149,700 |
159,034 |
|
I. |
Bog Development Schemes |
153,000 |
167,000 |
150,734 |
|
J. |
Rural Improvements Scheme |
264,000 |
288,000 |
222,600 |
|
K. |
Miscellaneous Schemes |
20,800 |
13,500 |
10,656 |
|
£1,022,800 |
£1,018,300 |
£1,006,979 |
At the peak period of employment last year, in December, 1955, employment was given to a total of 6,015 men, of whom 710 were employed on urban schemes and 5,305 on rural schemes.
There has been a further drop in the number of unemployment assistance recipients this year. According to the census taken by the Special Employment Schemes Office, the number of male unemployment assistance recipients in the whole country was 29,953 in January, 1956, compared with 33,576 in January, 1955, and 39,989 in January, 1954. This is a reduction of about 11 per cent. and follows a reduction of 16 per cent. in 1955 compared with 1954. The reduction was greatest in the urban areas, being approximately 17 per cent. compared with 1955, following a drop of 22 per cent. in 1955 compared with 1954. The figures for urban areas are 7,698 in January, 1956, compared with 9,316 in January, 1955, and 11,936 in January, 1954. For rural areas, including towns with a population of 200 and over, the figures were 22,255 in January, 1956, compared with 24,260 in January, 1955, and 28,053 in January, 1954. This is a reduction of 8½ per cent. compared with 1955 and follows a reduction of 13.5 per cent. in 1955 compared with 1954. The total number of men in receipt of unemployment assistance for the week ended the 7th April, 1956, was 25,325 compared with 27,310 for the corresponding week in 1955 and 32,429 in 1954.
Taking first the administrative sub-heads of the Vote, A to E: the increase of £6,105 in the salaries sub-head compared with 1955-56 represents mainly the cost of increases in Civil Service pay granted with the approval of the Dáil, with effect as from the 1st November, 1955. It includes, also, the normal increments which accrue as years go by, as well as increased salary scales for engineering inspectors. A number of these officers were formerly employed on a very temporary basis. In the last 12 months, they have been appointed as unestablished officers on increased scales. The annual increments for the staff and the increase in the salaries of the inspectorate establishment amounted to approximately £2,400.
Sub-head F (Urban Employment Schemes) is intended to finance employment schemes in the four county borough areas of Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Waterford, the borough of Dún Laoghaire, and such of the 55 other urban districts in which there are sufficient numbers of unemployment assistance recipients to form gangs of economic size. These schemes are administered by the local authorities concerned, through the Department of Local Government, and grants are made conditional on the local authorities submitting suitable works schemes for approval by the Special Employment Schemes Office, and making a contribution towards their cost. The contribution in the Dublin County Borough area is 20 per cent. In the other county boroughs it averages about 17 per cent., and varies between 5 per cent. and 17 per cent. in the other urban areas, the average last year being about 14 per cent. There is a substantial volume of work already authorised for execution, and the commitments for works not yet carried out in urban areas amount to £264,000. The provision in the Vote for this service (£140,000) is the same as last year, and there is also available an unexpended balance of about £200,000 from previous years' National Development Fund grants.
In Dublin a sum of £175,000 was allocated for grants for new works last year. Schemes to absorb £163,397 were approved and the balance, £11,603, was provisionally earmarked to meet the cost of additional work proposed on the road through the Memorial Park, Islandbridge. The total cost of the schemes approved amounted to £204,248, which include road works costing £83,622 and amenity schemes, such as parks and playgrounds, costing £120,626 of which approximately £52,000 is for the construction of a promenade, etc., at Howth Harbour. These figures represent the gross cost of the schemes and include the contribution from the Dublin Corporation. Some of these works have not yet started and on the 1st April, 1956, there was a carry-forward of uncompleted schemes representing approximately £200,000, in State grants. The average number of men employed during the financial year ended 31st March, 1956, was 240, of whom 175 were unemployment assistance recipients. Each man gets 12 weeks' employment and, as the gangs rotate every three months, approximately 700 unemployment assistance recipients got a spell of employment in the year. The number of unemployment assistance recipients in the Dublin County Borough area fell from 4,964 in January, 1955, to 3,937 in January, 1956, and the figure on the 14th April, 1956, was about the same, being 3,989.
Employment schemes in rural areas under sub-heads G and H form a joint programme of works. Sub-head G grants are for works on county roads, towards which the county councils concerned contribute one-quarter of the cost. Minor employment schemes, sub-head H, are for works on accommodation and bog roads. These two schemes operate only in rural areas, in which there are substantial numbers of unemployment assistance recipients and are carried out in the winter period, November to March. The provision in the Vote for both sub-heads is the same as last year.
The provision under sub-head I, bog development schemes, is for the repair and reconstruction of roads and drains to facilitate the production of hand-won turf by landholders, and other persons, for their domestic needs or for sale in neighbouring towns. These are ordinarily full-cost grants and contributions are required only in the case of privately owned bogs, which are let annually to a substantial number of tenants and where the owner's income from such lettings is so high that it is only reasonable to expect him to give some assistance towards providing reasonable road and drainage facilities for his tenants. The cost of this service continues to be high. The expenditure in 1953-54 was £132,000 and it was £150,700 in 1954-55. One thousand and seventy-three new schemes, costing £150,000, were authorised last year. The actual expenditure in 1955-56 was £167,000, more than 25 per cent. in excess of 1953-54.
The rural improvements scheme (sub-head J) makes provision for grants towards the cost of carrying out works to benefit the lands of two or more farmers, such as small drainage schemes, bridges, and the construction or repair of accommodation roads to farmhouses, lands or bogs. It is a contributory scheme and applies to all parts of the country, irrespective of the unemployment position. State grants varying from 75 per cent. of the cost in the case of farmers with an average land valuation of £18 and over to 95 per cent. in the case of farmers with an average land valuation of below £6 are available, subject to the balance of the cost being met by the benefiting landholders. Where the work is of substantial benefit to the general "outside" public, in addition to the farmers directly concerned, the percentage of State grant, where circumstances warrant it, can be increased.
The Vote provision for the rural improvements scheme is the same as last year at £197,000. The gross provision, including National Development Fund grant, in 1955-56 was £264,000 and 931 new schemes, costing £263,986 were authorised for execution. The cost of this service has increased considerably in recent years. Including local contributions, the expenditure in 1951-52 was £173,210. It went up in 1952-53 to £218,278, to £233,662 in 1953-54 and to £222,600 in 1954-55. Last year, the expenditure reached the record figure of £288,000. These figures, as stated, are gross figures and include local contributions by farmers averaging from 11 per cent. to 12 per cent., which are credited to the Vote as Appropriations-in-Aid through sub-head L. Notwithstanding the expenditure of £288,000 last year, there is a carry-forward, as on the 1st April, 1956, of uncompleted schemes sanctioned before that date, amounting to £81,600. In addition, contributions had been lodged with the Special Employment Schemes Office before the 1st April, 1956, representing a further expenditure of £52,800, so that we are starting this financial year with a commitment of £134,400. Apart from the Vote provision of £197,000, there is an unspent balance of £38,740 available from previous years' National Development Fund grants to partly meet this commitment.
The provision for miscellaneous schemes (sub-head K) is the same as last year. It is mainly to meet expenditure on minor marine works, such as the extension and reconstruction of small piers and slips to facilitate the fishing industry and for the landing of seaweed and sand in the interests of local farmers. The county councils concerned are required to contribute one-quarter of the cost of these marine works and to maintain them on completion. The sub-head also finances archaeological excavations at Tara, Lough Gur, Lough Gara, and other centres.
The Appropriations-in-Aid (sub-head L) realised approximately £38,000 last year. The sub-head is made up almost entirely of the contributions in respect of the rural improvements scheme, which amounted to £34,000. It also includes receipts in respect of bog development schemes, county council contributions towards the cost of minor marine works, and receipts from the sale of surplus stores.
The gross Vote provision in the current year, as can be seen in the statement at page 51 of the Estimates Volume, is £731,200. The amount brought forward as unexpended National Development Fund grant from previous years is £248,400 so that there is a total of £979,600 available. Decisions have not yet been taken as regards the possibility of the money so available being supplemented from the National Development Fund, or any other source, and the Estimate is being put forward, therefore, for approval on the basis of the provisions herein stated.
One would need to be pretty quick with the pencil to follow the Parliamentary Secretary's explanation of the expenditures under the various schemes. I take it that the estimates under the various sub-heads are the same. Vote 10 is of great interest to me and, I am sure, to most rural Deputies. While Votes 8 and 9 cover a considerable number of major activities, this Vote covers what may be termed minor activities, but which are not by any means minor in their importance to the people in rural Ireland.
The figures in the Book of Estimates and mentioned also by the Parliamentary Secretary are the same as last year. There has been, the Parliamentary Secretary says, a considerable increase over the years. I know that is true, but, if there is a considerable increase in the amount of money made available and expended, that does not mean that there is an increase in the volume of work carried out, because wages have risen very considerably in the past five or six years and, therefore, the same amount of work cannot be carried out with the same amount of money.
I know very well the difficulty the Parliamentary Secretary has in extracting even the amount of money that is provided for these schemes from the Department of Finance, but I should like to see the amounts increased under every sub-head.
I should be glad if the Parliamentary Secretary would give us a memorandum in regard to this Vote, as he did in respect of the Office of Public Works, to show the amount estimated each year, the amount expended under the various headings, the amount received from the National Development Fund and the way in which the money was expended under the various headings.
I know that in one year we got £500,000 from the National Development Fund to be apportioned and expended by the directors and officers in charge of special employment. I am told that there is a carry-over of £200,000 over the various years, but there is no indication that, in addition to that £200,000, there will be £300,000 made available for expenditure in the present financial year.
The Parliamentary Secretary has given us the figures showing the reduction in the number unemployed in urban and rural areas. There is very useful work to be done. In fact, it is not so much a question of creating employment as of carrying out useful work. I refer, in particular, to development work on bogs and rural improvement schemes. Considerably more money could be expended. I know that a great deal of very good work has been done. I am very interested in both schemes. In a great many places, there is a crying need for the improvement of bogs, drainage and road repairs.
There could not be any better form of national development than the repair of roads into bogs and bog drainage, because of the importance of the bogs in the West of Ireland, and those places where people depend on the bogs for their domestic fuel and because of the relation of this work to agriculture. It is certainly related very closely to agriculture. Where there is not good drainage of bogs and where there are bad roads into bogs, the people very often have to neglect their crops at the most important time of the year, in order to try to get their winter's supply of fuel. Otherwise, they would never get their fuel at all. It is a very great comfort to the people, where this work has been carried out, to know that they can leave their turf in the bog, attend to their crops and that, if necessary, they can go on Christmas Eve and bring home a load of turf without any trouble. For that reason, I think the sub-head dealing with the development of bogs is one of the most important sub-heads of the lot.
I should like the Parliamentary Secretary in addition to the £100,000 estimated under this sub-head, to call upon the National Development Fund for more money, so that the amount would be increased considerably. I know he has done so in the past. Nevertheless, it will be no harm—in view of what I have stated to the effect that the same amount of work cannot now be done for the same amount of money, in view of increased wages—for the Parliamentary Secretary to dip his finger a bit more in order to produce whatever additional money will be needed from the National Development Fund, particularly from that £200,000 of a carry-over. I should like to see 50 per cent. of that pushed in with the £100,000 for the carrying out of this work.
Another important sub-head is the rural improvement scheme. Very valuable work has been done, and our people have been placed almost in a second heaven in many parts of the country, as a result of work carried out under that scheme. We have to-day roads where the people can bring in lorries and cars to their homes and over which those of them who have to walk can go on Sundays with clean boots. In the old days, they had to walk over the fields, stepping from one patch of high ground to the other. This is a welcome change, although there is a great lot to be done yet.
In recent years, an Act was passed empowering county councils to take over the maintenance of culs-de-sac. While the spending of money under the rural improvement scheme has done very useful work, at the same time, there is a considerable amount of wastage, if the roads are not maintained. In some cases, it is very difficult to get the people concerned to maintain them, because, after all, they are fairly big jobs and the distances are fairly lengthy. Accordingly, it is not so easy to get the people to come together and to carry out the maintenance work.
County councils are very slow to take over any further mileage of road and they certainly will not take over roads which are in bad repair. The best chance that county councils will take over roads is that work on the roads, in the first instance, is carried out under the rural improvement scheme and that the roads are brought up to a certain standard of repair.
There is another aspect of the matter which has been mentioned freely all over the country and which is being pressed forward by the people concerned. Where there is a pretty big job of work to be carried out as a rural improvement scheme, the suggestion is that county councils should be permitted to contribute portion of the local contribution. Perhaps it might be difficult to fit that in; perhaps it might need fresh legislation on the part of both the Minister for Local Government and the Parliamentary Secretary. I believe it would serve a useful purpose, but there again there might be a difficulty, because it would be a matter for the county councils whether or not they should pay any portion of the local contribution. It would be a nice thing, if it were put to the test. Then the people concerned could not blame the Board of Works or the Special Employment Office.
This question of increase in wages has, in my opinion, diminished the amount of work being done. That is something that has always to be borne in mind. I do not criticise those increases in wages; I feel sure they are justified. They are paid to county council workers and to agricultural workers, and I think they are equally justified as far as the workers under the Minor Employment Schemes Office are concerned. Work has been carried out under that office which, in my opinion, stands on its own in comparison with any work of a similar nature carried out by county councils or the Land Commission. I was very glad to hear the Parliamentary Secretary state that a number of inspectors had their salaries increased, but they are still unestablished apparently. That is having a very bad effect. A number of them have been established in recent years.
It might be no harm to leave a number of them as they are.
If they are inefficient, there is a way of dealing with them. I have not met any inefficiency in that section, and if they are efficient and discharging their duties properly, there is no great encouragement for them to remain on, when they can get good jobs elsewhere. That is making it very difficult for the Minor Employment Schemes Office to accelerate and expedite the work. They find very often that some of the best men they have leave them, because they are not established. Their case has been brought forward often enough, and, if they get good jobs elsewhere, they cannot be blamed for taking them. As I have said, that is retarding this whole business.
Local authority gangers at the moment have a superannuation scheme. There is no superannuation scheme for supervisor gangers or gangers under the Minor Employment Schemes Office. I think these men should be placed in the same position as local authority employees. It is true that when the county council employees get increases the Minor Employment Schemes Office come along and increase the wages of their men at the same time. There is, however, the difference that the Minor Employment Schemes Office have no superannuation scheme although I think their men are entitled to it. This is not peculiar to the Employment Schemes Office. The same is true, I think, in the Land Commission. It is something that should be taken into consideration. When people give good, efficient and loyal service to the office and to the Department and to the people over a period of years, it is very gloomy for them to have to retire on the old age pension.
After all this period of time, they have no great incentive to be very careful with the work, or to be as careful as they would otherwise be. It will not attract men of the calibre we would like to see, because, as I said, the work being carried out is as good as the work carried out by the county councils or the Land Commission, and men employed by the Special Employment Schemes Office and on other works of this kind are entitled to superannuation rights and establishment, if possible.
I have nothing more to say on this Vote, other than to impress on the Parliamentary Secretary once again the necessity of putting his hand fairly deeply into the National Development Fund as far as two particular schemes are concerned, the rural improvements scheme and the bog development scheme. I know I need not tell him about them, but it is no harm to give him a word of encouragement when he is approaching a Department it is difficult to move where some very important schemes are concerned.
I feel that this Estimate is really one of the most important from the point of view of the people who are concerned with it. The works carried out under minor relief schemes and rural improvement schemes are regarded as very important, especially along the western seaboard and in my own constituency of South Kerry.
I shall deal first of all with minor relief schemes. I think that as far as possible, money is devoted in accordance with the number of unemployed in an electoral district. Sometimes, there may be eight or nine men unemployed in a district, and, in a neighbouring district, there may be a similar number, or something like that, but I understand that so far as the Special Employment Schemes Office is concerned, there must be a certain number—I think 12 or 15—in order to get the benefits of that scheme. I wonder if the regulations could be varied so as to allow two neighbouring electoral areas to be combined, so that works could be carried out that would be necessary not only for the improvement of the roads and land, but also in order to give employment. Furthermore, it is also very necessary, as far as possible, to have the work carried out before Christmas, so that the unemployed would have some benefit for the festive season.
Money expended on these minor relief schemes is always regarded as money that is to a great extent wasted. I am not so sure about that myself, but it is somehow regarded as money simply given to the unemployed for doing what they like and for doing as little as they can. I think a great deal depends on the type of gangers in charge of the work and, of course, as the Special Employment Schemes Office knows, we have grievances for many years in connection with these gangers, because it is only those of certain political affiliations who will be appointed. I think the time has come when the rules and regulations should be so changed that new gangers would get a chance of gaining experience. We know there are many complaints about that. We are told that gangers who had experience in bog work, or schemes of that kind back for the past 20 years are the only ones who can be employed, and it is often the case that, when money is allocated for the improvement of accommodation roads or minor relief schemes, because of objections by certain people to the gangers employed, the money is actually withdrawn.
It also happens occasionally that, even though money has been allocated for the improvement of roads or for drainage, that money is withdrawn when somebody through whose land the road or drain will pass, objects. I think something should be done to ensure that, once money is allocated for a certain scheme, any objection by some crank along that road or drain should not prevent the work from being carried out. I do not know exactly what power the board would have in connection with that, but I do know that the difficulty frequently arises.
The same thing happens in the case of the rural improvement schemes. In my own constituency, I know that, because of the objection of some peculiar individual, the work cannot be carried out even though the money has been allocated, and I should like to say that this rural improvement scheme is one of the best schemes produced by the Special Employment Schemes Office. It is a great pity that, when roads are being improved, or when drainage schemes are being carried out, something is not done to persuade the people who benefit by those schemes to effect some little repair on that road or drain each year or, perhaps, on that stream or river. In fact, I am hopeful the time will come when we will have all our main and county roads steam-rolled and then perhaps it will be possible to have these roads that have been improved by minor employment schemes taken over by the local authority and dealt with as we at present deal with the county roads, because it is absolutely essential that people living in remote areas or townlands should have roads as good as possible leading to their homes.
In Kerry, we have so many roads yet to steamroll and put into proper condition of repair that it is not easy for us to take responsibility for roads leading into various townlands and various pockets in mountainous areas, but I am hopeful that, not only in Kerry, but throughout the country as a whole, the time will come when all our main and county roads will be steamrolled, and that we can then take over all these roads which we at present call accommodation roads, so that all our people, no matter where they live, be it in a remote area or otherwise, will have the benefit of good roads into their homes.
I just wish to refer to some of the things that have been said by previous speakers, and particularly to matters mentioned by the speaker who has just sat down. In my own county, which is somewhat similar to that of Deputy Palmer, we have an unusually large road mileage that must be maintained by the council at the moment, and we have an even larger mileage of road which it is not the duty of the council to maintain, nor would it be in their power to maintain that mileage on the moneys they are now getting for road purposes.
