Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 8 May 1957

Vol. 161 No. 8

Committee on Finance. - Vote 38—Local Government (Resumed).

Mr. T. Lynch

Last night I spent some time drawing the Minister's attention to what I considered was the very bad way that my constituency was treated in the allocation of road grants. When the Minister is replying I do not want him to say: "That is what the Government you supported did." I believe the Government of the day should serve the people to the best of their ability and that, when an injustice is done and the Minister's attention is drawn to it, he should do the best he possibly can to remedy that injustice.

I should like to go back again now to this matter of tourist road grants. At column 280 of Volume 157 of the Official Report it will be seen that, so far as tourist road grants are concerned, Cavan got £10,000; Clare, £35,000; Cork, £55,000; Donegal, £55,000; Galway, £55,000, Kerry, £55,000; Leitrim, £25,000; Louth, £55,000; Roscommon, £25,000; Sligo, £25,000; and Waterford, £5,000. That is something that should be remedied this year because Waterford is an entry port for tourists. We have there resorts like Tramore, Dungarvan, Clonea and Ardmore on the coast. Tramore is a premier seaside resort, with a magnificent strand. Years ago, we were told that the road would be continued the whole length of the strand from the existing promenade right down to the sandhills. I would respectfully point out to the Minister that this is a matter that should receive his attention and, instead of allotting merely £5,000 to Waterford for tourist road grants this year, the amount should be considerably increased, so that the road—a great tourist amenity—can be finished.

With regard to employment schemes, I would draw the Minister's attention to the fact that one year Waterford got £250, another year £250 and another year £300. That amount should also be increased. I do not know how these allocations from the Road Fund for the upkeep and improvement of roads are made. If these allocations are made on the amount of road tax paid, then, much to my surprise, we must have been buying fewer and fewer cars in Waterford over the past three or four years because the amount of the grant has been going down steadily. It went down from £137,000 to £132,000. I believe it should be increased rather than decreased.

We would be very grateful in Waterford if the Minister continued the cooperation that we had from his predecessor and the co-operation we had from himself when he was Minister on a former occasion. We have put in a scheme from Waterford County Borough for the building of 170 houses. I appeal to him to give that scheme his urgent consideration. The direct labour guild in Waterford is a worthwhile body. That has been proved over the years. This body is at the moment building its five-hundredth house.

In conclusion, I again appeal to the Minister substantially to increase the tourist road grant in relation to County Waterford, the grant for the upkeep and improvement of roads and the employment schemes grant.

Mr. O'Donnell

First of all, I should like to apologise to the Minister for the fact that I was not here last night when he opened this Estimate. I have endeavoured to procure a copy of his speech, but I have unfortunately been unsuccessful. I understand it is not the fault of the Minister or his officials. Neither have I been able to procure a copy from the ordinary channels through which one applies when one wishes to have a copy of a statement made here. I understand that the Minister was himself slightly handicapped since he was called upon when he least expected to be called.

I shall have very little to say on this Estimate. The Estimate was prepared by the Minister's predecessor, but he is now responsible for it. As a former Minister for Local Government, my first duty is to pay tribute to the staff and officials of the Department of Local Government. I found in the Department of Local Government, as I am sure the Minister found on a former occasion and finds again to-day, nothing but co-operation and helpfulness from the highest official, namely, the Secretary, down to the lowest. It is a matter for the Minister to dictate policy and, in that regard, I am certain that my experience there will be continued, namely, that the policy dictated by the Minister will be implemented fully by the officials. I take this opportunity of putting on the records of the House my admiration and respect for the officials of that Department.

Now, if I may say so, I sympathise with the Minister in many ways. The Department of Local Government is purely a spending Department. It is the conduit or pipeline through which finances flow from the Exchequer to local authorities. Sometimes, if there appears to be a plug or block in that pipeline, it is not the fault of the Department of Local Government, of the Minister or his officials. He may be marking time for very good reasons. Some of us, before we become familiar with the ramifications of local government and the difficulties under which the Department works, do not always appreciate the position. If, at times, the trickle through the pipeline is very slow that is not the fault of the Minister or his officials. They can merely facilitate the trickle through of what the Minister procures from the Department of Finance.

I was rather amused to read a few weeks ago a statement made by the present Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, after he had taken up office, at a victory Fianna Fail dinner at Ramelton. He said one of the first duties and one of the first jobs of the present Minister for Local Government and the Cabinet would be to turn on the financial taps and to release tenders and contracts which were held up in the Department of Local Government. So far, I am afraid there has not been very much of a flow and, judging by this Estimate and judging by what we heard in the Budget Statement to-day, we cannot expect much of a financial flow.

I was very glad to learn to-day that the present Minister and the present Government will implement the under-taking given by me, namely, that all commitments in regard to housing entered into by local authorities will be honoured. I was very glad indeed to hear from the Minister for Finance to-day that money was being provided for that purpose.

I am sure that, like me, the Minister would like to see local authorities continue the supplementary housing grant schemes, but, if the money is not available, we have just got to put up with it. The Minister cannot be blamed for that. I have come to the conclusion that we have reached the stage where we should have a stocktaking of the housing problem of this country. During the last few months in which I was Minister, I asked local authorities to re-examine the position as there was a danger—it actually happened in some cases—of over building. Deputy Larkin looks at me, but I am not referring to the City of Dublin. There is undoubtedly in certain parts of the country over-building and there has been a neglect of reconstruction.

How often do we find small towns in rural Ireland with eyesores in the centre, undemolished derelict sites which could be reconstructed and made into useful accommodation for people residing in these localities and thus avoid the necessity for and the cost of transport from the suburbs into the centres of these towns. The survey which I initiated and which I hope will be carried out will enable the Minister to make a realistic assessment of our housing needs. I thought at one stage that in the City of Dublin there should have been a revaluation of the housing needs of this city.

Personally, I think that two things are responsible for what may be termed the traffic problem in this city. First of all, the corporation have extended their area too far out into the country, with the result that people employed in the centre of the city have to be transported from the city to their residences and again from their residences to the city. The result is that we have a traffic problem. We got people out of the slums, but we put them on the streets, if I may use the expression, for the purpose of transporting them. I am sure the Minister will reconsider these matters when he comes to examine the housing problem in the City of Dublin.

The previous Government gave an undertaking to the Dublin Corporation that they would provide £4,000,000 last year, £4,000,000 this year and, if in office, £4,000,000 the following year for the financing of the capital projects of the city. At that time, I asked the corporation to allocate a minimum of £400,000 for small dwellings. I do not want any discussion on the matter now; I merely mention the matter in passing. It is a great pity that the £400,000 which was eventually made available in January or February was not made available in July or August when the moneys were allocated. If it had been, there would not have been, in my opinion, what is known as the housing crisis in the city, particularly in view of the fact that not only was a sum of £4,000,000 given for last year, but also for the present. There is nothing in this Estimate to increase that amount. It has not been said that Dublin Corporation will get £4,000,000 for the coming year.

I think the previous Government set a headline for Dublin Corporation. We all know the difficulty they had in procuring finance. We all know the flops which their loans have been in the past. They decided that there would be no more financial flops so far as loans were concerned and decided that they would advance £4,000,000 and they could cut their cloth accordingly. I think Dublin Corporation have been very well provided for, and if my successor can do more for them, I shall be greatly surprised indeed.

I think I should pay a tribute to Cork Corporation for the manner in which they had their loan subscribed last year. As has been pointed out, they will have no more financial difficulty in so far as loans are concerned.

I merely heard the contribution of Deputy T. Lynch to this debate in which he particularly referred to tourist road grants. During my term as Minister, I decided that there should be a greater allocation from the Road Fund for county roads as distinct from main roads. I said in this House that, in my opinion, we were building boulevards for pluto-crats and that we were neglecting the roads leading into agricultural land, farmers' houses and labourers' cottages. The more I see of our roads, the more I am convinced of that. The more I read of the accidents on our roads and examine the statistics, the more I have come to the conclusion that it is upon these boulevards the greatest number of accidents occur. I hope the Minister will see his way to continue the policy initiated by me by the allocation of a greater sum each year for our county roads in order to bring them up to a reasonable standard.

Successive Governments have agreed —it is common policy—that increased agricultural output is what is necessary if we are to survive. The day of the horse is gone and we have now got to depend upon mechanisation for increased output. I hope the local authorities will take advantage of the option they have with regard to cul-de-sac roads and that some of them will eventually be taken over. I think it was Westmeath which specialised in the taking over of these cul-de-sac roads, but, unfortunately, having regard to the money available to them out of the Road Fund allocation, very little could be done.

Quite recently, I had the opportunity of having a discussion with some American tourists motoring through this country. They were amazed at the standard of our main roads. There is no doubt that if one goes from here to Donegal, Galway or Cork, one will see that these arterial roads have reached a high standard, but once we go down to the back roads of rural Ireland, we get into difficulties. I ask the Minister to give serious consideration to the continuation of the policy initiated by me in regard to the county roads. I agree with Deputy Lynch that more could be done for the tourist roads, particularly tourist roads in the Gaeltacht.

We have got to decide some day what we allocate road money for. Is it to give employment or make roads? Personally, I would rather see the roads brought to a high standard by means of mechanisation than manual labour, because once we have got our roads up to a fairly high standard, moneys may be allocated and diverted to other channels which will give us productive employment and be of much more benefit to the economy of the country. We should not spend money on roads merely for the purpose of spending it. I am afraid that most rural Deputies advocate the spending of money on roads purely for the purpose of the labour content involved.

As a result of the tariffs last year, local authorities were unable to procure machines which they consider necessary for the improvement of our roadways. Those tariffs are now gone. I feel certain the Minister will sanction the purchase of any further machinery that local authorities may find necessary. If he does so, in a few years' time, the roads will have reached a sufficiently high standard of excellence to enable us to divert moneys which are now being spent on what I must describe as non-productive work to other channels.

I feel certain that the Minister will endeavour to secure some continuity of policy as I did when Minister for Local Government. The Estimate, not having been prepared by the present Minister, but he being responsible for it, there is very little I can add.

Mr. Larkin

There are one or two points which have been made already by the former Minister with which I must deal at the commencement.

It surprises me that a former Minister for Local Government who would normally be expected to have some real knowledge of the position could, when speaking on the Estimate of his successor, refer with some disparagement to the fact that Corporation building has extended too far out from the city centre. Surely Deputies are aware that no local authority building is permitted without the permission of the responsible Minister. Every scheme, whether it be for the construction of houses or flats, whether it be for ten houses or a dozen flats or 500 houses, is submitted by the appropriate local authority and given ample, and sometimes too prolonged, examination in the Department of Local Government. Therefore when an ex-Minister of this Department is critical of this heading one wonders whether he should not look into his own conscience.

There is another factor in that reference by the former Minister. Up to 12 months ago, Dublin was growing very rapidly for a very prolonged number of years. Adding very seriously to the already overcrowded position and slum conditions was the constant influx from the provinces. I have not as yet heard, and I hope the present Minister can advise the House, how a local authority—whether it be in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Waterford or anywhere else—can stop Irishmen and Irish families from migrating to a city within their own shores. Seeing that, for 30 years, no one has yet found even a glimmer of a solution to the problem of Irish men and women and Irish families leaving the country, it appears to me to be ludicrous to suggest, even by inference, that a local authority has only to hold up its hands and say: "You cannot come in here. We have not enough room to build any more houses."

Many times, and in many places, reference has been made to the fact that the City of Dublin has been spreading too far—as if anyone connected with the local authority could stop it from spreading. It is true that possibly, in the course of the past ten years or so, a little more emphasis could have been placed on the construction of flats within the city boundary. Anyone who is or who has been Minister for Local Government is, no doubt, aware that sites for flats are not acquired overnight, that plans are not prepared overnight and that flats are not built overnight. No doubt approval has been given up to the present to the continued building on the perimeter of the city mainly because it is only by concentrating to a great extent on building houses around the outskirts that it is possible, to provide a large number of dwellings in a reasonable space of time. However, that is not, I think, the problem for the future.

The problem for the future as regards building—I should like to address these few remarks to the present Minister, in particular— appears to me to be a concentration on building within the city area. We know that a limited number of sites are available. In all, some 60 sites have been earmarked. Some of them may readily be acquired while others may take some considerable time to acquire. Nevertheless, everything possible should be done to expedite and simplify the machinery necessary to deal with the building problem in our city.

Reference has been made to the possibility that there is over-building. A recent survey by the city medical officer shows that there are still some 13,000 families in Dublin City without adequate accommodation. We know that, at times, there are difficulties in letting houses built on the very edge of the city. Such difficulties have been experienced for many years. They appear to be greater at times when attractive flats are nearing completion in the centre of the city. Families sometimes feel that it would be much more convenient for them to be housed in flats in the city which are near their places of employment, their shopping centres, their churches and schools rather than on the outskirts of the city. For that reason, they are sometimes most reluctant to accept accommodation four or five miles out from the city centre. That is a perfectly natural and human position and one with which I do not think anyone could quarrel.

The former Minister referred to the financial position. I do not know whether, as far as building is concerned, it was the financial position or a policy but I do know that since 1951 there has been a steady reduction in the number of dwellings provided. There has been a more progressive reduction in the amount of employment given to building craftsmen engaged in the construction of either houses or flats in the city. I hope that when the Minister is examining the many problems involved, he will give some attention to this aspect of them.

Roads in rural Ireland are somewhat outside my experience and I feel some trepidation in commenting upon them; but surely it has been the recognised— and quite properly recognised—practice down the years to endeavour to marry two very worthy objects, the development of roads and the relief of unemployment in rural areas, especially among workers who, during some part of the year, can work on farms or on the bogs. We are reaching a position in this country when the name of the great god, efficiency, is on everyone's lips, but purely from the angle of laying down a yard of road, while it might prove slightly less costly to lay it by machinery, I hope the Minister will bear in mind that the slight saving there may be—in some cases there will be possibly no saving in that approach—may very well result in a cost in another direction, the cost of trying to provide the family of the worker disemployed by this form of mechanisation with some form of unemployment insurance or relief.

I strongly recommend to the Minister that in his approach to these matters, he might take into account all the factors involved, including the factor that a spell of unemployment in a rural area especially is the greatest encouragement that any of us can imagine to those concerned to cast their eyes outside their own country for employment. We are continually being advised that the one thing our country cannot stand indefinitely is the continued emigration of our people. I would be pleased if the Minister would indicate that local authorities in the country and in the city here can carry on with the housing programme as far as it is in their power to do so. I hope the Minister is in a position not to indicate that money will be recommended, but to give some assurance that the money will be available.

I appreciate that the Minister for Local Government is not the Minister who can tell us that money will be available for specific purposes, but assurances have already been given that, as far as Dublin is concerned, the programme for housing under the corporation's own housing schemes and the programme of development under the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Acts could proceed up to a maximum expenditure for the current year equal to that of last year—a total expenditure of £4,000,000.

I hope we will be able to spend that amount of money and I hope the Minister in his directives to those who work directly under him or who are under his control, will assist us by performing an operation which has been referred to on many occasions, that is, the cutting of the red tape.

The building of houses in Dublin is not confined to housing of the working classes and the situation of those who wish to build their own houses has become very difficult. Towards the end of 1955 and last year, financial uncertainty created a number of very serious problems. This year, conditions governing the issue of grants and loans from the Local Loans Fund appear to be creating problems of their own because two points of view appear to be taken as to whether, in certain circumstances, an applicant can qualify for a grant. If an applicant does not qualify for a grant, he does not qualify for a loan and the house is not built.

I urge the Minister to examine all the conditions governing the issue of loans and grants for those who wish to provide their own accommodation, with a view to seeing if there is any way in which he can ease the present difficulties.

Grants have been made in increasing amounts in recent years for the purpose of encouraging people to repair their dwellings or repair their property. These grants are being availed of to a greater extent each year and I would again recommend to the Minister's attention this form of encouragement.

The success of the efforts of local authorities depends to a great extent on the liaison that exists between the local authority and the Department. I do not propose to criticise in any way the officers of the Department because the Minister will accept full responsibility, but I do say to the Minister, and say advisedly, that in recent years, on too many occasions, housing and development schemes have been held up because of a delay in giving sanction.

There is one aspect of this problem which I would ask the Minister to take into account. The question of cost where you are building a house is important; it is even more important if you are building 500 houses or 200 flats; but, when you come to build flats in a city area, whether it is the City of Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Waterford or any other city, there is one factor that is not common where you are building on the outskirts of the city. That factor is the cost of acquiring the site. That cost, taken in conjunction with building costs, may inflate the cost of building a room by some hundreds of pounds. I suggest in all seriousness to the Minister that when it comes to a question of examining housing and particularly flat building, from the point of view of cost, he should consider the cost of the site as a completely separate item.

In Dublin, if you acquire a site which has been cleared or which has been occupied by semi-derelict houses or dwellings for a period of years, you may acquire at a very low cost and yet, within a quarter of a mile of that site, the cost of acquiring another site, equally suitable for flat development, may reach a very substantial figure.

The problem in Dublin remains the housing of some thousands of families. That problem has been faced and tackled with greater or lesser success over a number of years. The problem now, basically, is rapidly becoming the problem of constructing flats in the central city area. That is due to the fact that the ground available is almost used up and, secondly, because of increasing transport costs, etc., the limit of building development is reached around the city.

In conclusion, I would again point out to the Minister that, since 1951, a period of six years, there has been a steady decline in the construction of dwellings in the city. There has been a steadier and larger decline in the employment of craftsmen. I would ask him, as the responsible Minister, to take whatever steps lie in his power to endeavour to arrest that decline and to continue the policy which has been the accepted policy, I am sure, of this House and of successive Governments over the years, of not resting until all families living in unsuitable, unsatisfactory or overcrowded conditions have decent homes of their own.

Mr. Kitt

Galway County Council also had a housing problem. We were one of the first local authorities to adopt the supplementary housing grants scheme. We first adopted it without a means test. Later, the Minister, when he was Minister for Local Government previously, introduced a scheme which was very suitable for our county because it benefited the poorer sections of the community for whom the Act was primarily intended. As a result of the State grants and supplementary grants, a great deal of useful work was done in County Galway, as, I am sure, was done in other counties throughout the State.

However, about a year ago, we got into difficulties because we were accepting applications and, like Micawber, were hoping for something to turn up. We found that there was no money forthcoming. We continued to accept applications and carried on the scheme for supplementary housing grants, for new houses, reconstruction and installation of water and sewerage, up to the end of the financial year. Then the trouble was that people who had started to build houses or who were making provision for reconstruction or for installation of water and sewerage and who had entered into commitments with contractors or builders' suppliers found that no grants were forthcoming. County councillors were pestered with letters and we made several appeals to the Department, all to no avail.

Recently we got a small instalment and I, in conjunction with other Deputies in the county, put down a Parliamentary Question last week to the Minister and he informed us that he has recommended the payment of £150,000 for these grants. I am sure that news will be most welcome to applicants and I hope that that money will soon be issued to Galway County Council so that they may make payments that are long overdue.

Having got that reply to the question, I made it my business to see the Secretary of Galway County Council on Saturday last and I find that the sum mentioned, large as it may seem and generous as it was on the Minister's part to announce it, will pay only the supplementary grants due up to last August. If we are to carry out our commitments in full we will need another £30,000 or £60,000 from the Local Loans Fund. We have discontinued the scheme now for this financial year but a lot of useful work was done and more remains to be done. I hope that the Minister will be able to give us an assurance that we will be able to carry out our commitments.

Another matter to which I wish to refer is the position regarding water supplies. In our county we have several towns and villages which are still without a proper water supply. We have sent up these schemes to the Department for approval and we have to await their decision. My idea about the question of water supplies, and I hope that the Minister will go into the question some time, is that they should be taken out of the hands of local authorities and put on a national basis. I would like to see a board set up which would be a semi-State body such as Bord na Móna. We could have a Bord Uisce. It could be granted so much money and could provide water supplies on a regional basis throughout the country. I have in mind a small town near my own village where I know that the cost of the water supply involved an enormous amount of money and still only supplies one small town with 20 or 30 houses. If the water supplies were on a regional basis all the villages around the particular locality could be supplied. A charge could be made for the water in a similar way to the charges made by the E.S.B. for electricity. There could be a fixed rent so that every farmer and householder could avail of the supply. I could envisage the employment that this would give in rural Ireland and I can envisage the saving of labour that it would result in so far as the drawing of water is concerned.

As the busiest time of the year when small farmers are cutting turf and thinning beet they are forced, for half their time, to travel with ponies and carts to rivers and lakes, which may be three or four miles away, to draw water. They spend so much time drawing water that they would gladly pay the water rent if such a board was set up. If we are to have the increased production which we are talking about, such a step would help production apart altogether from giving employment. We have rural electrification throughout the country in nearly every place now but to my mind this is more important. I am not speaking about bathroom facilities so much as having running water on tap for the household and the farmyard.

The only other remark which I will make on this Estimate is that I agree with Deputy Larkin about machinery. I would not like to see too much machinery replacing men in our county. The road workers in our county are paying into a pension fund and they must work for 200 days in the year to qualify for that. If we have unemployment and men laid off, owing to the fact that too much machinery is being used, that would not suit the economy of road workers in our county. Most of them are small farmers or the sons of small farmers and most of them are pensionable servants. I shall conclude by wishing the Minister the same success in this term of office as he had previously as Minister for Local Government and I hope he will continue to do the same useful work.

Mr. Coburn

My remarks on this Estimate will be very brief. I notice that it is for an amount rather similar to that for last year, approximately £4,700,000. The present Minister is experienced in this Department, having held office before, and I feel and hope he will make a success of it and ensure that many improvements will be made within the ambit of local government. I should like to refer to one particular point to which Deputy O'Donnell referred, that is to derelict sites which are such an eyesore throughout the whole country. They are harmful to the very intensive tourist drive that is in progress at the present time. I think I am right in saying that grants are available to local authorities for the eradication of these sites and for the replacing of them with small parks, perhaps, or with trees where they could be planted. I think the Minister should draw the attention of these authorities to that fact. Sufficient importance is not being attached to the grants that are available for the eradication of these eyesores, as I term them.

I think it was some time last year the ex-Minister for Lands brought in a Bill whereby legal difficulties with regard to the acquisition of land for afforestation would be eased in order to expedite the forestry drive. The same thing could apply to derelict sites because very often the whole trouble lies in the fact that legal difficulties obtain when these sites are to be acquired by the various local authorities. If the Minister could intensify the drive to eradicate that trouble I think he would receive the thanks and commendation of everybody.

Last year a lot of attention, and a lot of talk, was devoted to the question of loans for houses. In the course of the various debates that year a lot of importance, and rightly so, was attached to Dublin and Cork Corporations. This year I think £4,000,000 has been allocated for building houses in Dublin. I should like to remind the Minister that there are other places besides Dublin and Cork in this country. Even though the problem of housing is great in those cities there is also an acute problem down the country in other towns. No matter how many houses are built, the same insatiable demand for more houses is there and I would impress on the Minister the urgency of dealing expeditiously with applicants for loans from counties such as my own county, Louth, and others outside Dublin and Cork. It is only right to say that in proportion to the population and the demand for houses more importance should be attached to Dublin and Cork.

I should also like to remind the Minister that there is a housing scheme pending in a place named Cocklehill in Blackrock, three or four miles outside Dundalk. It is proposed to build a number of houses there. The land on which the houses are to be built was acquired compulsorily some time ago. So far nothing has been done except that the Department some time ago sent down a request to the Louth County Council seeking a reappraisal of the means and conditions of the various applicants for these houses. I think that was more or less a ruse to put this scheme on the long finger and to discourage the continuance of this housing drive. I want to impress on the Minister that there is an acute demand for these houses and he will be doing a good day's work if he can expedite the matter.

Regarding roads, last year the former Minister, Deputy O'Donnell, took a step forward, in my opinion and in the opinion of councils throughout the country, when he allocated £500,000 towards the improvement of county roads as against main roads. It is a fact that most accidents occur on long, wide stretches of main road. Motorists come along and see a long expanse of road ahead of them. They feel the sky is the limit so far as speed is concerned, that no such thing as an accident can happen. Of course, the unexpected happens; they are not prepared for it and an accident occurs.

Another good result of applying more money towards improving our county roads would be that it would aid our tourist drive. Most of the county roads lead to tourist spots. Tourist centres are not to be found along the main roads; they are to be found in the hidden by-ways. For that reason alone, if for no other, it would be a good thing if the Minister devoted more attention and more money to the repair and upkeep of county roads.

I notice in the Book of Estimates that this year more money is being allocated for the provision of sanitary services. One of the sub-heads in that section relates to swimming pools. Here again I must strike a local note and ask the Minister if he intends to implement the decision taken last year to grant £6,000 towards the provision of a swimming pool at Blackrock, Dundalk. There is a local development association there, the Blackrock Development Association. They are very anxious that this swimming pool be provided. Blackrock is a tourist centre and a swimming pool there would be an added amenity and one which would be very much appreciated by many people.

A proportion of the necessary money has been earmarked from the rates by Dundalk Urban Council and Louth County Council. This is in addition to the local contribution collected from people interested in this project. These people realise that the swimming pool would be a great attraction in the area. It was the Department of Finance that, more or less, promised the £6,000 would be given and I suppose these remarks should properly be addressed to them. But the Department of Local Government did have a hand in it and I would ask the Minister, if he can, to help on this project at the most opportune time, which I hope will be soon.

I do not think I have very much more to say except to wish the Minister success. Although he is not on my side of the House I still wish him success. I hope he will devote much attention to this very important Department. It is the Department in which there is the greatest liaison between the Government and local authorities. I hope that this time next year we may be able to look back on a year of progress in local government.

Mr. Casey

Over the past few years, when I rose to speak on this Estimate, I endeavoured to spotlight the difficulties confronting Cork Corporation in regard to their housing programme and I make no apologies to anybody for opening on the same note again this evening. I think it is generally accepted that the housing problems of this country have been largely solved in very many areas. That has been done as a result of the very fine efforts of successive Governments and as a result of the intelligent and courageous manner in which local authorities have tackled those problems. No matter how critical we may be of one another from time to time, I think we should at some time stop, reflect and say that successive Governments have done a good job in rehousing our people. All of us should take pride in that.

However, there are still a few pockets, such as Dublin, Cork and perhaps the larger centres, where the problem is still a major one. On former occasions here I gave details of specific cases of persons seeking rehousing in Cork. I endeavoured to point out what a very grave social evil was represented by the typical cases I quoted. I shall not bore the House by repeating those cases. I am quite sure the Minister is well aware that we have a major problem in Cork City still and that we require something in the region of 4,000 houses before we can say we have solved that problem. No Party has lagged behind in facing up to it. No individual member can claim greater credit than another in endeavouring to solve this problem. We had to go to the previous Minister for Local Government and we had to go to the present Minister when he was Minister on a former occasion. I must say we were sympathetically received at all times.

On this occasion the corporation, in my opinion, is faced with the most serious problem it has experienced in the last decade as far as the financing of its housing programme is concerned. So far, we have not been so sympathetically received. I say "so far" because I feel that, as a result of representations, the Minister will see his way to take Cork Corporation, and particularly Cork City Deputies, into his confidence and discuss the matter with them.

As you are aware, Sir, the problem arose on this occasion because Cork Corporation were advised that the amount of money to be made available from the Local Loans Fund was such that it would not meet the requirements of their capital programme in the present financial year. Up to last year the corporation had been in a position to finance its own capital programme from moneys secured in the open market. It was because of the circumstances which existed last year that the corporation for the first time had to have access to the Local Loans Fund.

In the financial year 1956-57, Cork Corporation got from the Local Loans Fund £825,000 to meet its capital requirements. I qualify that statement straight away by saying that at first it was intimated we were to get £750,000 but subsequently, on its being pointed out, during representations to the Minister, that such a sum was not sufficient to meet our commitments for house building and other capital works, we got a supplementary sum which brought the total up to £825,000.

That is approximately our requirements this year. The Minister will appreciate that any local authority, dealing with a large housing problem, must have its plans made in advance. We cannot wait until the end of one year to make our plans for the following 12 months. Consequently, the house building programme of Cork Corporation for 1957-58 has been determined long ago. Our requirements in that regard have been pointed out to the Minister. The corporation unanimously decided to ask the Minister to receive a deputation of the five Cork City Deputies. It was left to me to convey this message to the Minister on the phone and I was very disappointed when told that he refused to meet the five Deputies to discuss what is a major problem, not only to the people in Cork responsible for housing but to the many people who are awaiting new houses.

I could imagine the Minister refusing to see me, but I do not see why he was so reluctant to meet his three colleagues—the Minister for Education, Deputy Healy and Deputy Galvin. As I have said, the Minister absolutely refused to meet us. I was sorely disappointed. I had not endeavoured to make political capital out of this matter. Deputies Healy and Galvin can confirm that I felt the matter was too serious to be dealt with in any but a serious manner. I wrote a personal letter to the Minister, couched in the most sober terms. I endeavoured to put the case as straightforwardly as possible. I outlined the serious position in Cork and the serious repercussions the Minister's decision would have, first of all on the people waiting for houses, and secondly on the employees engaged in the building industry and on the contractors.

As the Minister is aware, as well as our direct labour scheme we also build a considerable number of houses under the contract system. In my letter, I appealed to the Minister to meet the Cork City Deputies. I said that with our local knowledge we might be of help to the Minister. I suggested particularly my own personal desire to be as helpful as possible in the matter and I offered my co-operation to the fullest extent. After a delay which I am quite sure was unavoidable, the Minister replied to my letter, again refusing to meet the deputation. In the last paragraph of his reply, he intimated that he did not intend to enter into any review of the present pace of building in Cork City.

I was gravely disturbed by this letter and so were my colleagues in the Cork Corporation. The Minister's own colleagues in the House were disturbed that, in spite of the major problem confronting the Corporation, they now have to cut back their house building programme instead of increasing its tempo. We were advised by the Department that we would have to make adjustments in our programme which would result in a saving of £3,000 per month for six months and £6,000 per month for another six months on our direct labour schemes. We were advised to cut down on our contract schemes and to delay the start of other schemes.

I hope and am confident that my colleagues who are members of the Minister's party will join with me in endeavouring to convey to the Minister the serious repercussions that would flow from such a state of affairs. We have already cut down on our direct labour house-building schemes despite the fact that houses are badly needed, that we have a serious unemployment problem. We had last week to lay off 40 or 50 men. That is only the start. When we come to September we will have to postpone our contract scheme. I feel sure that Deputies Healy, and Galvin and the Minister for Education will not for one moment back up the Minister on the stand he is taking.

At this stage I do not wish to produce press cuttings or to quote from contributions made during the election campaign in Cork or from advertisements issued in the newspapers addressed to people seeking houses and addressed to corporation tenants. I refrain from doing that because I am quite sure these statements were issued by the Fianna Fail candidates in Cork in good faith. Having issued such statements in good faith, and having been returned on that programme, I challenge them that it is their duty now in this House, and in private with the Minister, to see that the programme they put before the people in Cork in regard to housing is implemented. In conclusion, I should like to wish the Minister every success in his efforts. I should like to convey to him the knowledge that, as far as local government in Cork is concerned, he will have my full co-operation.

Mr. Corry

No Estimate which comes before the House is more important to the representatives of local authorities than this Estimate for Local Government. I should like first of all to compliment the Minister on the manner in which he put his case before us. He dealt with practically every subject that arises on such an Estimate; he dealt with a very difficult situation in a manner we on this side of the House, at any rate, have been accustomed to expect from him.

Mr. J. Brennan

You will get Youghal Bridge after that.

Mr. O'Donnell

That cock will not fight any longer.

Mr. Corry

I wish to refer now to a scheme for the site in Ballinacurra.

Mr. O'Donnell

The Deputy did not raise that on the adjournment yet.

Mr. Corry

In September, 1955, the report of that was presented to the Minister's predecessor. By December, 1956, the then Minister had not given his decision on that report. That was the speedy way in which things were done in the Department of Local Government in the happy period we have just passed through.

Mr. O'Malley

Look back in anger.

Mr. O'Donnell

The Deputy did not even know the water was flowing alongside the site.

Mr. Corry

I addressed a question to the then Minister on the subject and gave him every opportunity of examining the position and giving a decision on it. He gave his decision without, I would say, even reading the inspector's report.

Mr. O'Donnell

I heard the Deputy; that was sufficient.

Mr. Corry

If he had read the inspector's report, I would expect any professional gentleman of his education to have been able to judge it on an inspector's report. I was here when he proved that he had not even read the report. Here is his statement, as given in the Official Debates, column 2164, on the 6th December, 1956:—

"It is merely to clarify the position. The suggestion of the local authority is that they should build six unserviced cottages a distance of a quarter of a mile from the village of Ballinacurra. If we are to build these cottages, we cannot give them the amenity of water, if we build them this distance away from the village; but in the village there is a water supply and if the cottage are built in the village, they can be serviced by piped water. That is a very important amenity and adds very little, if anything, to the weekly rent."

The actual facts are that there is a piped water supply, a main, running along the road just outside that site.

Mr. O'Donnell

Why did you not tell us that, that night?

Mr. Corry

You were told it that night.

Mr. O'Donnell

Read it again; read what you said.

Mr. Corry

You were told it that night and it is a Minister's job to examine his inspector's report. Surely he had officials enough tumbling over one another over there in that Department, for some one of them to read the report for him and explain it to him, if he was too lazy to read it himself? There was a water main outside that site.

Mr. O'Donnell

Did you get what you want since?

Mr. Corry

The former Minister came along the following morning and he made up for all the delays. After 18 months' delay, as he stated himself, he came along on the following morning, for fear he might read the statement which had been made clear the night before, and he signed a rejection of the Compulsory Purchase Order.

Mr. O'Donnell

The Deputy is suffering from Youghal-itis.

Mr. Corry

He rose from his slumbers at 10.30 the following morning to sign the rejection Order and send it down to Cork. The unfortunate people in that village are waiting—they are still waiting—for the 16 houses, which were to be built.

Mr. O'Donnell

Get cracking now.

Mr. Corry

He followed that up by a rejection of the second site.

Mr. M. J. O'Higgins

What have you done about it since?

Mr. Corry

I was busy getting rid of you; and I had a fairly soft job in doing that.

Mr. O'Donnell

The Deputy did not get as near the front bench as he thought.

Mr. Corry

The former Minister came along and condemned the second site because it was too expensive to get rid of the derelict houses which, in his softer moments, he will complain about, saying everyone should get rid of the derelict sites in villages and remove the eyesores. He got rid of the eyesores and now we are left with four unfortunate people living in condemned houses on two of the sites which were to be built on.

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

Mr. J. Brennan

There are only two Fine Gael Deputies in the House, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. Where are the rest?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is out of order in interrupting. Deputy Corry is in possession.

Mr. M. J. O'Higgins

It will be noted that Deputy Brennan just came in, in answer to the bell.

Mr. Corry

I raised this matter here with the present Minister for Local Government and he had to inform me that he had not any power to interfere, once the Compulsory Purchase Order was rejected. So these people can thank Deputy O'Donnell for the loss of their 16 houses, or the delay until such time as a sites committee goes down once more to re-inspect the sites and look for a Compulsory Purchase Order on the second occasion.

When I heard Deputy Casey speaking here about the delay in housing, I began to think over the unfortunate people down in Cork.

Mr. O'Donnell

For the past 30 years.

Mr. Corry

No, no; not at all, but under Deputy O'Donnell's jurisdiction.

Mr. M. J. O'Higgins

Was it only then the Deputy started thinking about them?

Mr. Corry

It was only then that——

Mr. O'Donnell

The necessity for houses arose.

Mr. Corry

——that they discovered the country was burst.

Mr. O'Donnell

There is a blister on it to-day, mind you.

Mr. Corry

There was no bother at all in getting sanction. Sanction arrives for £200,000 and you will be waiting for the £200,000 for nine months; and when the nine months are up, you get £20,000 and the men who had built the houses are there waiting for their money and have no money to get.

Deputy Casey complained about unemployment in the building trade in Cork. That was the reason—there was no money to pay the grants and the loans which the county council was giving to the private builders who were building their own homes. There was no money for the contractor; the contractor was unable to pay the builders' provider; the builders' provider provided no more material; and Deputy Casey's men had to walk the streets. As a matter of fact, I find, from the Minister's statement, that he has sanctioned £1,240,000 to be paid to banks, contractors and persons to whom the money was left due by his predecessor—on private building alone.

Is it any wonder we have unemployment in the building trade? However, that is only a small portion of the picture. In the South Cork Board of Health, our medical officers and inspectors carried out a housing survey. On that survey we decide the number of houses that it is proposed to build— 15, 16 or 20 houses, as the case may be—and send that up to the Department of Local Government for sanction. On this occasion there was no money in the kitty so the Minister and his officials got a brain wave. Having held it up as long as they dared for three, four or five months, they sent down another circular to have a resurvey and to find out whether some of these houses—houses that were condemned by the medical officer—could not be repaired. That was the manner in which the Minister succeeded in holding up housing. My objection in this is to the employment of officials in the Department of Local Government for the purpose, not of expediting housing but of holding it up.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister is responsible for the administration of the Department. The Deputy may not criticise officials.

Mr. Corry

I am dealing with the manner in which this Department was administered during the past 12 months. Would it not be more honest to say: "There is no money here for that at the moment. Wait until we get it"? Instead of that the Minister's officials were used in an endeavour to throw dust in people's eyes, absolutely regardless of the extra expenditure they were imposing on local authorities. Last week I instanced the case of a man for whom a site had been obtained for a rural cottage. Sanction was sought from the Department as to the amount to be given for it, but that was left in the Minister's Department for seven months until the present Minister sanctioned it and sent it out. There are so many officials in that Department falling over one another——

Mr. O'Donnell

Well, get rid of them.

Mr. Corry

——that we have nothing but the issuing of contrary Orders to the local authorities. For example, I had to bring one instance before the manager about two months ago where four different officials of the local authority went out in turn to examine one site for a labourer's cottage. The architect went out to inspect the site; the deputy county surveyor went out to inspect the site; then the housing engineer and the county surveyor inspected it. They all passed it.

Mr. O'Donnell

If it was at election time, I am sure the Deputy inspected it too.

Mr. Corry

I would have paid far more attention to the proposals of the Minister for Finance to-day in introducing the Budget if he had proposed a complete investigation into each Department with a view to the cutting down of surplus staff. He made one statement here that the country could not carry that burden, and that is true. Money is scarce now, and we know that when honey is scarce in the hive the drones will be killed. Under instructions sent out by the previous Minister for Local Government we had the spectacle last month of having to ask the law adviser for a ruling as to which of the five heroes was to make the inspection and report.

Surely we are not so prosperous that the ratepayers of this county or of any county or local authority can afford to pay five officials to inspect the site for one labourer's cottage. That is only one of many instances that have occurred. The contract stage was reached in respect of a large number of houses and sanction was sought from the Department for the tenders. Although those tenders were lower than practically any tenders previously accepted by the Department of Local Government, they were rejected and we were told to look for new tenders. I do not know whether they expected any of the building materials to fall in price or whether it was not another portion of the Department's instructions: "Do anything but allow no more houses to be built." It was one of the two at any rate, but I cannot put my finger on which it was.

However, the facts speak for themselves. The contract was £1,020 per house. It was rejected. A team of officials in the Department was doing nothing for the past six months, if not longer, except examining ways and means of holding up housing schemes. That was their job. We heard a lot of talk about expediting house building. We had a lot of warnings from the other side of the House to-day, but the present Minister has to find £1,340,000 which was left due by his predecessor to the private builders. That money has to be found now.

There is the liability to the Road Fund to 31st March, 1957, in respect of road maintenance and improvement grants and other liabilities, of £4,212,000. That is another little item left due, unpaid. Payments in respect of their existing liabilities to the Road Fund would be the first charge on the £4,787,000. This amounts to £2,600,000, due to local authorities last year for road improvement and not paid. This is a little bill that is left as a tail-end. The Minister has very decently come along now and added £900,000 to that, but he says that will have to be repaid by the Road Fund over a number of years. I think it is time that we had a little straightening out of this Road Fund. Could we be given the amount taken out of that fund by the Minister for Finance each year for the past ten years when preparing his Budget? Could we find out whether the Road Fund owes any of that £900,000 or whether the boot is not on the other foot? That is information we should get, if the Minister will be kind enough to give it to us when he is concluding. If not, we shall have to get it by way of question and answer in the House.

The Minister promised us on a former occasion that the Road Fund would not be raided again while he was in office, and he kept that promise. I hope, when the accounting is being done now, that we shall have a straightening out of this item.

I come now to another matter, namely, the attitude of assistant county managers towards the people who have to find the money. Here, again, we have a load of red tape. We have endless writing by officials who, apparently, have nothing else to do except to try to find something to occupy their spare time. Or is it their overtime?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister is responsible for the policy of his Department.

Mr. Corry

If a labourer's cottage or a non-municipal house becomes vacant now in the South Cork area it takes 12 months before a new tenant is installed. That is about the average. First of all, the housing inspector has to inspect the house. He is followed by the medical officer, who inspects it all over again. Then there is an examination of the applicants and one applicant is picked. That is only the start of the trouble. The next step is that the landlord receives a notice asking if he is going to demolish the house or carry out certain repairs to the house, and so forth. The tenant will not be moved out until all that is finished. According to what our legal adviser tells us, that could go on for ten months at least. That is the instruction of the new manager whom we were presented with as a gift from Dublin. Every week that one of those houses remains vacant represents a loss in rent and in income to the local authority.

If a house remains vacant for a long period, as unfortunately houses do now from nine to 12 months, there is a repair bill of anything up to £20 or £30. If there is a regulation of that type in the Department of Local Government at the moment, I am wondering when it arrived there. Whose was the brainwave? When we had the late assistant county manager, we had none of these delays. The longest I ever saw a house vacant in that period was a month, but they are now vacant for 12 months. I want that matter remedied also.

These are only some of the matters I would like to go into briefly in this debate. I am sorry the Minister is doing away with the Local Authority (Works) Act. We did a lot of good work under it in Cork and we had hoped to do a little more. However, I can quite understand the position of a Minister who had to find £1,340,000 to pay the debts of his predecessor in regard to private housing. I beg the pardon of the House for not having the time to find out how much he had left due to local authorities in regard to housing. I am sure there were another couple of million there, together with the £2,600,000 in road improvement grants. The county councils were told that the money was there for them, but it never came. The Minister who had to find all that has done a pretty good job and on behalf of the unfortunate people in Cork whom I know were just bankrupt, owing to the action of the previous Minister in the Department in withholding housing grants, I wish to thank the present Minister for the good job he has done. I think it is only just to do that.

I suggest to the Minister that he look over the number of secret instructions which were sent down to county managers of local authorities during the past 12 months—secret instructions in regard to the ways and means of holding up housing schemes and delaying progress in regard to other essential matters. Let him look up these, scrap them and notify their lordships, the county managers, that they have been scrapped. If he does that, he will be doing a good day's work for us who are members of local authorities. We do not want to be pressed into the position of having to come before a local authority seeking the suspension of a county manager, but, if put to it, we will do it. We do not want to be placed in that awkward position but neither can we afford, as representatives of the ratepayers, to lose thousands of pounds each year under the policy which was carried out in regard to housing. It is something we are not prepared to stand for. I have given the facts as I know them and I have given nothing but facts.

Mr. Lindsay

As you know them.

Mr. Barrett

Deputy Corry is a skilled and competent local administrator and there is quite a lot in what he said, but I am amazed at the cold and hard cynicism with which he comes in here and moans and groans about what he calls the number of Deputy Casey's men who had to walk the streets of Cork because they could not get employment in the building schemes in Cork City. He moans and groans and points an accusing finger at the Minister's predecessor in regard to that situation, at a time when there are more and more of Deputy Casey's men walking more and more of the streets of Cork City because Deputy O'Donnell's successor deliberately denied to Cork Corporation an opportunity of continuing the building schemes which were initiated under the Minister's predecessor.

Mr. Corry

Tripe.

Mr. Barrett

Last year, it is true that we got £750,000 from the Minister's predecessor and that was supposed to meet the needs of the City of Cork in regard to corporation building schemes. Deputy Corry seems to forget that when that £750,000 was exhausted and when we were, to quote the phrase of one Cork City Fianna Fáil Deputy, scraping the bottom of the barrel, the Minister's predecessor came along and gave us £75,000 extra, which enabled us to continue in employment the men who were building the houses and continue the production of houses which were so badly needed in the constituency which I represent.

Mr. Corry

You mean he promised it.

Mr. Barrett

We got it. We will not get it this year.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Corry has already spoken.

Mr. Barrett

He wants to speak again.

Mr. Lindsay

He is addressing the Spring Show in the Gallery.

Mr. Barrett

I am not suggesting local authority building schemes as a way of absorbing unemployed men. I agree that if we have not got the money, we must cut our cloth according to our measure; but if we are to cut our cloth, let us cut it in matters which are not quite as close to the moral and social bone in Cork City as in Dublin City. We are not simply discussing a way of dealing with unemployment when we ask the Minister to see the five Cork Deputies on the question of housing in Cork. We are dealing with the lives of men and women. We are dealing with the surroundings in which children are to be brought up, in which the fundamental unit of our society, the family, has to grow and flourish. I am quite sure there is no need for me to recite to the Minister the type of cases with which we have to deal in Cork City. I am quite certain they have been brought to his notice both in his present short term of office and in his previous terms.

There are many cases in Cork City where a man, his wife and three children have to sleep, eat, cook and live in one small room. If the Minister inquires from the housing authority in Cork, he will find that what I am saying is no exaggeration. It is on behalf of these people that the five Cork City Deputies, not just the Minister's own Deputies or the Opposition Deputies, approached the Minister and asked to see him.

I should be very glad if the need had not arisen for me to talk about the matters which I broached. We felt it was in the interests of the citizens of Cork and the social life not only of the older generation but particularly of those growing up. We felt the Minister ought to meet us and give sympathetic consideration to the problems we put before him.

The Minister has not seen fit to meet the five Deputies from the second largest city in the country and, therefore, it is necessary for me to tell him what I would have been glad to tell him in private, that there is a grave and terrible necessity and wherever the Minister looks to make savings, he should make available to Cork City funds for which Cork Corporation—a corporation in which the Minister's Party holds the majority of the seats— have asked. Again, I am not suggesting that it is purely a means of absorbing some of the unemployed. I am suggesting, however, that if the Minister looked into it, there might be ways and means by which we could produce as many houses with less expenditure than we have had in the past.

For many years, we of Cork Corporation and we who represent Cork City in this Chamber have been imploring the Minister's Department to approach the question of the housing of the working classes in a realistic fashion. We have told them that the best judges of the proper type of local authority houses are those who have to live in them. We have told them that those who have to live in them have a right to tell the Minister, through their representatives here, the types of houses in which they wish to live. We have told them that if it comes to a decision by the Minister on the advice of his advisers, who certainly have never lived in these types of houses, or the views of those who had to live in them, he might be well advised to adopt the hard, practical views of the men and women who have had to live in these houses, pay the rents for them and bring up their families in them, because that process will continue so long as these houses are there. Men and women will have to live in them, pay the rent for them and bring up their families in them. That is why we want houses properly adapted to that purpose.

We have had in Cork City, and I am sure it happens in every city on which the Department forces its views in regard to housing, a system under which the Department insists that a certain type of house, with a certain amount of ground at the side of the road which is a certain size, must be built. Time and again, the Minister and the Minister's predecessor—I am not saying this now in criticism of the present Minister or of his Party since they took office recently—have been told that the people who have to live in them do not want that sort of house, that there is a more economic sort of house that can be built, where families can be brought up happily and in good health.

Time and again, it has been pointed out that these people do not want houses built 12 to the acre. They want terrace houses, small houses which are economical to keep, to heat and to pay for. For some strange reason adumbrated by some strange people in the Department, you must have 12 houses to the acre and the Cork Corporation had to go down on their knees to the Minister's predecessor before they got some small concession in the matter. I think they may now build 15 houses to the acre.

The Minister and Cork Corporation could save quite a lot of money, and we in Cork would be anxious and happy to save that money, by building smaller houses on less ground, by building houses which a man could keep on much less money from the point of view of furniture, floor covering, coal, gas and electricity. I would ask the Minister to approach the problem earnestly. It is a practical way of dealing with the many difficulties which the Minister's Department is now meeting in regard to housing.

I fully realise that the results of the Minister's research into that matter, and any Order he may see fit to make, will not immediately be felt. Meantime, I beseech him to look into the question of what he can do in regard to continuing the rate of housing in Cork City. We were in the unfortunate position that at one stage more houses were being built in Waterford and in Limerick than in Cork City. I am not saying that that is the fault of the Minister or of his Department. The fault in that regard lies locally. Now, however, that Cork Corporation have got to grips with the problem and that they and the officials are anxious to grapple with it, as a special act of grace, I would appeal to the Minister to investigate ways and means of winning the race against disease and social evils.

You cannot expect a man to bring up his children to love and respect the family surroundings if these surroundings are simply one filthy room in a filthy garret where the smells of cooking pervade the place all day. The children go into the street. Heaven knows what they learn there, possibly to their social or moral detriment, apart altogether from the possible damage to their health. There is not much point in building sanatoria to cater for such types of persons afterwards, when we could take the more fundamental step of preventing the spread of these germs in the homes which eventually drive the disease-ridden bodies into sanatoria and hospitals. I am quite sure I need not stress the importance of that aspect because I feel certain it has been brought home to the Minister before this.

As I have been on the question of building smaller houses, even for large families, I would ask the Minister also to try to impress on local authorities the need to build houses for newly-weds, for old couples who have run their race and set their families up in life and who now live alone, for the widow and for the widower. There are many such people not alone in my constituency but in any big city or town in this country. Marriages will continue to be made and young couples will continue to look for houses in which to spend the early years of their married life. If we build more houses of the bungalow type, we will avoid many social evils and young couples will sometimes be enabled to set up earlier in life. In the course of time, they will have families and they will then move out of such houses to larger houses, making way for more young couples coming along. These houses would fill a great social need in regard to newly-weds and also in regard to some older people who are now more or less thrown out on the side of the street, deserted, or else who have to live with their families where there is the danger of discord in a mother-in-law or a father-in-law, son-in-law or daughter-in-law atmosphere. Furthermore, these houses are cheaper to build than the larger type of house which we have been providing and there is just as great a need for them as there is for the larger type of house.

I should like the Minister also to draw to the attention of local authorities the mandatory nature of the letting regulations under which local authorities should let their houses to tenants. I personally know of cases where men and women who are not at all entitled to local authority houses have been given them. These houses are built for a certain type of person with a certain type of family. The rights of such families should be jealously guarded and nobody else should be allowed into these houses until the needs in regard to the sections of the community for which the houses were built have been filled.

I am sincere in wishing the Minister well in the difficulties he has to meet. I appreciate that they are there and that they are very real. I would ask him also to bear in mind that our difficulties in Cork City are very real and very practical. They should not be looked upon simply as temporary measures to keep somebody in employment. It is bad enough to know that from 40 to 50 men will be unemployed in Cork as a result of what the Minister said he feels he must do, but it is worse to know that social consequences of a very serious type follow.

I would not suggest that we must spend money simply for employment. In building houses of that nature, native timber, native materials and other commodities produced almost entirely in this country are being used; native labour is being used. You are building houses which are always looked upon as a good investment because there are always people ready to pay a rent for them and the Minister will at least get some of the money back rapidly. It is not as if we were asking the Minister to put his money into some non-productive scheme. I should be sorry to think that the Minister would look upon such schemes as unproductive. They are productive of all that is best in our national life, of happiness in the home, of good health, of proper social and moral qualities for which we look in the younger generation in this nation.

Mr. Gallagher

I should like to hear from the Minister what his view is regarding the Dublin Housing Consultative Council. I appreciate that he has not been long in office and that possibly he could not get round to deal with this council which was reconstituted by his predecessor in August last. When this consultative council was set up in 1948 by the late Deputy Murphy, then Minister for Local Government, there was a complete reversal of the position that exists to-day. There was a shortage of houses and of skilled labour and a great deal of uncertainty regarding the Dublin-Howth main drainage scheme. It could also be said that there was then no real long-term plan. To-day there is a complete change. The great majority of the overcrowded families have been housed by Dublin Corporation. There is no shortage of labour and I think the main drainage question is settled at last. The corporation have now reached the position where they are dealing with the housing of small families and it is therefore reasonable to ask: is there a necessity for the council to-day?

I have attended many meetings of this council and its members are all very keen and competent people, most anxious to co-operate in solving the difficulties that arise in regard to housing problems. Recently I believe the members of the council are conscious of an air of futility at their meetings because they are going over work already carried out by the Dublin Corporation and the corporation's housing committee. One cannot blame these people who are not members of a local authority—they are trade union officials, representatives of churches and schools and other outside bodies— if they feel frustrated.

I would suggest to the Minister, if he decides that this council should continue, that he should ask the council to deal with some specialised work that will restore some life to the building industry, and that I think is very important. The members of the council would like to know exactly where they stand. Since it was set up, the terms of reference have not changed. I would ask the Minister and his officials when they come to consider this matter to bear in mind what I have said. As reconstituted by the Minister's predecessor, I think the council consists of very competent persons and it is unfair to them to be asked to come to meeting after meeting to listen to a re-hash of what the corporation has done or intends to do.

I hope the previous Minister will not think that I am critical of the council itself. When it was set up the idea was certainly a good one and I would like to see the council getting down to some useful work.

I do not know what has been said up to this regarding Small Dwellings Act activities but I think every effort should be made to encourage these loans. There has been a slowing down in applications—I am speaking from the Dublin end of it—for various reasons. To my mind, money allocated under the Small Dwellings Act is very wise expenditure because it provides a man with a home for his family and gives him a certain amount of pride in not being a liability upon the State or the local authority. It gives him a chance to have a reasonably happy life—provided he has not a nagging wife or a television set. No matter what the difficulties, we should ensure there would be no hold-up in Small Dwellings Act activities in Dublin, Cork or elsewhere, and anything the Minister can do to provide money and to approve schemes should be done.

Mr. O'Donnell

The Deputy and his company can do a lot too.

Mr. Gallagher

I think they have played their part.

Mr. O'Donnell

I would like to compliment them on it.

Mr. Gallagher

And they will continue to do it all along the line. With other organisations they can certainly serve a useful purpose in providing what everyone here would like to see —decent homes for our people. As Deputy Casey said, all Parties and all Governments have done their best to solve that problem which cannot be solved unless there is co-operation between the Government, the local authorities, workers and trade unions.

To emphasise the popularity of schemes under the Small Dwellings Act it is interesting to note how few people surrender their houses. The great majority make a brave effort to maintain their houses and meet repayments. Although many thousands of Small Dwellings Act loans were issued by Dublin Corporation, there are only 22 vacant houses on the corporation's hands to-day. I think that is a tribute to the man who makes an effort to buy his own house. From 1948 to April, 1957, 5,282 loans amounting to £8,992,355 were issued for small dwellings by Dublin Corporation. There are possibly more since before 1948. That is a fair share of money and the average loan would amount to £1,400.

It is to the credit of those people who made the effort to provide their own homes that, of that number, there are only 22 houses on the hands of Dublin Corporation to-day and they are possibly cases where the bread-winner died or there were some other difficulties. It is a great tribute to everyone concerned and abundant evidence that the provisions of loans under the Small Dwellings Acquisition Acts certainly should be encouraged in every way by the Minister's Department.

There is one matter that is causing some concern to Dublin Corporation at the present time, that is, the question of vandalism, especially in public parks. Recently, at a meeting of a committee of which I am a member, very serious complaints were received that park attendants were attacked by young, troublesome fellows and, even worse than that, that there were very serious crimes committed in public parks. That is a matter that requires serious attention. My own view is that Dublin Corporation will need to recruit younger men as attendants.

Mr. O'Donnell

Let them go to the stadium when they want a few.

Mr. Gallagher

The sporting organisation I am attached to would certainly supply excellent recruits and I do hope that, if the corporation decide to get younger people, they will approach my organisation.

Mr. O'Donnell

Why call it yours? Why not call it ours?

Mr. Gallagher

My main reason for mentioning it is that I feel park rangers or attendants should have greater powers, powers like those vested in harbour police. If Dublin Corporation or any other local authority appeal to the Minister to introduce legislation to give them such powers, it should be considered very favourably indeed. It is very important that this sort of serious crime should be clamped down on right away. While park attendants have given great service to Dublin Corporation, some of them are getting on in years and are not able to cope with these attacks by these very active, troublesome people.

The other crimes that were complained about are more serious and by the time the guard arrives, these people are gone. If park attendants had more powers, it would be a great help and I suggest that the Minister should favourably consider any proposition towards that end that may come from any local authority to the Department during the year.

In regard to plans submitted to the Department by Dublin Corporation, there have been a few delays, but not many. We have got a great deal of co-operation from the Department in the ordinary housing programme for rented houses. Dublin Corporation have built 33,834 dwellings, and that is quite a good record. Of those, 5,311 are tenant purchased, the balance are let on weekly tenancies. We have still a fairly large programme. We have dealt with the majority of the large families and are now dealing with the smaller families. That raises the problem of the subsidies given to local authorities. For dwellings provided out of a State contribution, we got two-thirds for the major subsidy and one-third of the minor subsidy. Now that we have dealt with the larger families and have come to deal with the smaller families who are living in unfit dwellings, finance becomes a problem.

Another problem is that there are many thousands of families living in corporation houses as sub-tenants. If the corporation houses them, they are not entitled to any subsidy. These are matters that the Minister and the Department should take into consideration. There is not much that we can do about these sub-tenants. A son of the tenant may get married and may bring his wife into the house or the daughter may get married and bring in her husband. These people cannot be thrown out; they must have somewhere to live. The position is that they are not eligible for the major subsidy. Following a review last year, the corporation decided not to confine the allocation of houses exclusively to maximum subsidy cases. At the present time we are getting applications from minor subsidy cases. The Department should listen to the corporation's views on the question of the minor subsidy. It represents a big problem, especially where there is overcrowding in corporation houses. I realise that we have received generous grants from the Department through the years and we do not want to be considered as being like Oliver Twist, asking for more, but we must ask for more in view of the very great problem facing us which we are anxious to solve in the best possible way.

I ask the Minister to consider the points I have made. I should certainly like to hear his views on the question of the Dublin Consultative Council. I do not mention it in any critical way, but I do think that it could do a certain amount of useful work. At the moment there is an air of futility which I should like to see cleared away.

Mr. O'Donnell

The Deputy will appreciate that it was non est from 1951 to 1954.

Mr. Desmond

Deputy Coburn mentioned the importance of co-operation between the Department of Local Government and the local authorities. I fully agree. We all realise the importance of the parts played by local authorities and the Department. We also appreciate that in rural Ireland the Department of Local Government plays a more important part in relation to the everyday problems of the people than any other Department. Therefore, irrespective of what Government may be in power or what Minister may be in charge of the Department, success in this field of activity depends on co-operation.

I will be candid in speaking on this Estimate and say that the Department of Local Government was not the outstanding Department of the late inter-Party Government. We had much difficulty there—we are not hiding the fact—but it must be understood that when we address our remarks to a Minister for Local Government, those remarks indirectly apply to the Minister for Finance because, no matter what the Minister for Local Government may consider advisable, he may find greater difficulties in securing the green light from the Minister for Finance than Deputies may find in their endeavours to secure advantages for their constituencies from the Minister for Local Government. Nevertheless, the Minister for Local Government must be prepared to accept responsibility. I am quite prepared to admit that we had many difficulties in the past and I hope that in the future we will not be faced with a continuation of these difficulties.

In relation to roads, I should like to draw the Minister's attention to one important aspect in regard to their construction. In doing so I consider it only fair to give credit to the Minister for Local Government in the last Government, Deputy O'Donnell, at least in so far as the question of the use of machinery in County Cork was concerned. We all understand the advisability and necessity for using machinery in the construction of roads but the question arises to what extent the use of machinery is advisable. To what extent can local authorities continue on a spree of buying imported machinery? As a member of the Cork County Council I had hoped that my colleague, Deputy Corry, would lay aside the Minister's brief and draw particular attention to the problem that we have had of spending so much money on the purchase of imported machinery. As I say credit is due to Deputy O'Donnell because as Minister for Local Government he did take note of our complaints and decided, in our opinion wisely, not to give sanction to the purchase of additional machinery.

It is a strange fact but it is true that in some local authority areas, irrespective of the fact that sufficient money is not being provided through the annual estimates, coupled with the annual grants, to give full employment on the roads for the full 12 months of the year, it still seems to be a convenient policy with county managers and county engineers to advise the members of local authorities on the importance of continuing a policy of buying more machinery. The policy is to buy more machinery, use it on the roads for a few months and then leave it idle in county council yards for the rest of the year. That has been the policy in the past and I sincerely hope that the present Minister for Local Government will make sure that the action of his predecessor in regard to refusing to give sanction for the purchase of additional machinery, in Cork at any rate, will form the policy of the future, especially as the livelihood of so many road workers will always be at stake.

Another point in relation to roads to which I would like to refer is that I understand that at intervals there are conferences in the Minister's Department between the Minister and his advisers and the various surveyors in each county regarding the various types of road construction. In the last few years I have seen a departure from what we might really say were the old but trusted methods used in the construction of roads, with a foundation of solid stone. We were told that new methods were better and that the new methods gave us more mileage at a cheaper cost. Apparently when the local engineers advised the members of the local authorities on this policy they were doing so at the behest of the Minister for Local Government and his Department. Let me say here to-night, and I speak from experience, that this new departure in relation to the gravelling and tarring of roads will cost each local authority a colossal amount of money, within the next four or five years, through the repairing of these roads. Already we are getting proof of the unsatisfactory nature of this new type of road-making. I consider it essential that the Minister should again inquire into the matter to see whether this new policy will be the policy of the future or whether the slower but surer policy of a solid stone foundation will again be put into operation.

The new method has proved conclusively in County Cork (1) that there is an unsatisfactory finish on the roads, (2) that there is less work and fewer days of employment for the road workers and (3) that there were very large sums of money available for contractors who are able to get rid of a type of gravel for the roads that could not be used for any other purpose. The ratepayers in Cork and elsewhere, if they are not already suffering from this new departure, will find that they will be suffering from it within the next few years and that new methods very often do not prove best.

I am sorry, as Deputy Corry also said he was sorry, to hear of the suspension of the Local Authorities (Works) Act. I remember in 1948 when the then Minister introduced that Act. He was a man who spoke with a knowledge of the advantages which would accrue from this important measure, a man with 25 years of solid experience behind him, 25 years of unbroken membership with a county council. That was the late Deputy T. J. Murphy, God rest his soul.

I quite understand there was opposition at that time to the introduction of that Act but Deputy Corry was not one of those who opposed it. He knew the advantages that could follow from it. I am very sorry to see that we now find it necessary, apparently, to suspend that Act. I hope that wiser counsels will prevail. I would be satisfied if the Minister had informed the House that works under this heading would be suspended, perhaps because of the lack of funds, but I would be most disappointed if I thought that it was being shelved and would not be thought of again. My words to the Minister may not mean anything, but perhaps a recommendation from Deputy Corry to a Minister of his own Party, as one who realised the importance of the work that could be done under this Act and who supported its introduction, could help the position. I would ask the Minister to have the matter reinvestigated.

In regard to housing, I was surprised at Deputy Barrett's statement in relation to the type of person who is getting a tenaney. I do not know what system is in operation in other local authorities but I do know that in South Cork the tenancy of houses has never been influenced by the members because of the satisfactory way it has been handled by a county housing superintendent, who is outstanding in every way, and by a county medical officer who does not believe in such a thing as favour. The county medical officer realises his duty to be fair to everyone and he has been fair to everyone. In regard to the tenancies of houses in our constituency, be they village type houses or rural cottages, we can always say that everything is above board.

For some years past grants have been given to persons building their own houses. As Deputy Casey said, over the past years, irrespective of what Government was in power, we can see an improvement in the situation. At present, people can avail of grants up to £250 or £275. In certain circumstances they may be able to avail of grants from the local authorities also. All that helps, but applicants still have a very high hurdle to surmount. An applicant may be lucky enough, for example, to secure a loan of £1,000 from Cork County Council. He will find, however, that repayment of that £1,000 amount to £2,400 or £2,500 over a 35 year period. I believe it is essential that we should give the people ineligible for council houses, particularly white collar workers, the opportunity of building their own houses. We should co-operate with them in every way. In regard to the giving of grants and the repayment of loans, would it be possible for the Minister and his Department to co-operate with local authorities so that a lesser rate of interest might be charged to applicants? I am not demanding that from the Minister. I have no right to demand it from a Government I may not be supporting. I did not do so in the past. I am merely making a suggestion. I am convinced that the feasibility of any suggestion put to me will be considered by the present Minister. I would like him to see if he could implement this suggestion.

We find ourselves in a dangerous position as regards housing at present. In Munster, Leinster, Connaught and that part of Ulster which is ours, we find that a very high number of houses are the property of local authorities. There are schemes whereby the tenants of these houses may purchase them but these schemes are not always successful. If we could in future give a greater inducement to people to build their own homes, instead of depending on local authorities for the temporary tenancy of a house, I believe we would be giving those people the greater sense of security which would come from their ownership of their own homes.

The point on which I wish to conclude was mentioned by Deputy Corry. He dealt with it briefly. I think the Minister's brief upset him a little and he did not want to be too hard. Two years ago and three years ago I drew attention to this matter. It may be considered a recurring item and is not a complaint against one Minister only. I always understood that it was essential by law in this country that all trade union organisations should have a licence for negotiation. It has applied in every case except one. It seems that no licence is necessary in the case of the County Managers' Association.

I want the Minister to understand that the responsibility is his. I am asking again, as I have in the past: who pays the travelling and away-from-home expenses of such people when called by the Minister to meet him or his officials in the Custom House? I do so, not in a mean, vindictive way, but because I am satisfied that the results are most harmful to the interests of the Minister, the local authorities and the people generally.

Deputy Corry rightly referred to the number of circulars issued by the Minister for Local Government to county managers and assistant county managers. We have heard more statements made by managers and assistant county managers about their rights and their conferences with the Minister for Local Government than anyone would wish for. We have now arrived at the stage that, at times, circulars are spoken of, not issued, by members of this association informing us that certain decisions are being taken. It is made clear at once by these responsible officers that they are prepared to refuse to co-operate with members of local authorities because they seem to think they have the Minister for Local Government and his Department behind them.

I started by saying I fully agreed with Deputy Coburn in his remarks about co-operation. While I am in favour of a system of county management, and although I spoke in favour of the amending Act introduced here in the last couple of years, I do not want a system which would give the right to a Minister for Local Government and other people down the country to ride rough-shod over the members of local councils. These people should co-operate with the local authorities. It is true that members of local authorities have been given some protection in the recent Act by reason of a clause in it which gives them the right of demanding a manager to do a certain thing and of going so far as calling for his suspension if they can prove such is warranted.

Finally, may I say I hope the time for circulars is finished; I hope the circulars which in the past were sent out telling local authorities how they should thatch the roofs of county council cottages are finished with. We saw a lot of that, not between 1952 and 1954, but in the last couple of years. We in the Labour Party had occasion to speak very plainly about what we were prepared to accept in that regard. If we are to hope for success in relation to housing, in relation to water and sewerage schemes, this bottleneck system in the Department of Local Government—the system which has meant hold-ups in tenders for house-building, the system which has been the cause of so much disagreement in local authorities— must be broken. If that system is to continue, let the Minister realise that he will not receive the co-operation he should receive. We hope to see the end of the era of circular, circular, nothing but circular.

Mr. J. Brennan

This is perhaps the most important Estimate that comes before the House and those of us who are members of local authorities are always anxious to seize the opportunity perhaps to repeat what we have been saying year after year, the things we think should be done and which are not done and the things which are done which we think should not be done.

Most of the speakers so far have confined themselves to particular items of administration in regard to the work of local authorities. Before I deal with the particular items that concern me, I should like again to stress a very important point—a point on which I have been harping year after year—namely, the growing burden of administration and its cost to local authorities. I do not know when a Minister may undertake a complete overhaul of our entire local government system, but I do know that the burden of local administration is growing out of proportion to the capabilities of those who are handling it.

The increasing rate on agricultural land and property is something that will have to be tackled sooner or later. They are two separate points. The question of the increasing burden of local administration is due to the fact that many things are divided between central and local authority, grants from the Exchequer being always accompanied by a call for a proportionate contribution from the local authority. Consequently, the amount of work is increasing and the amount of the rates going up annually until we have reached the stage where we wonder how far we can ask the rate-payer to come to the aid of the not-so-well-off, since he is rapidly entering that category himself.

Mr. O'Donnell

Would the Deputy agree that we should cease appointing rate collectors?

Mr. J. Brennan

The Deputy will not get me to commit myself at the moment.

Mr. O'Donnell

The Deputy cannot blow hot and cold.

Mr. Smith

How many council officials would the Deputy employ to do the work of rate collection, if he were to get rid of the rate collectors?

Mr. O'Donnell

Kerry County Council could tell you.

Mr. Smith

We have a fair idea of what they have achieved by that method.

Mr. J. Brennan

I am concerned with the increasing rate and all through the year the local authority members request the County Manager and the various officials to give sympathetic attention to this and that scheme. It may be the provision of water for a few tenants in a rural area, the reduction of a hospital bill for some patient who had to pay more than he could afford. Every day we are acting as the buffer between the public and the various officials in trying to get little improvements here and there for the benefit of people. Then, when it comes to the annual rates meeting, we all set out to try to reduce the rates which we have been responsible, to a great extent, for increasing during the year.

It is a system which calls for review, a system which will have to be amended sooner or later. The impact of these schemes on the local authority, since it comes gradually, has not been felt until recently and I think it is the utmost hypocrisy for members of local authorities to talk about economies on the eve of the striking of a rate, when they themselves have been responsible during the year for increasing that rate though advocating various schemes on behalf of some taxpayer or ratepayer.

Mr. O'Donnell

Or supporter?

Mr. J. Brennan

I must say that in local government the question of political favouritism does not arise very much. Up to the time the previous Minister took office, many of us had divergent views on the question of the operation of the managerial system. I for one felt that certain amendments were necessary. I am not saying this for the purpose of casting any aspersions on the former Minister, but he promised and brought in a Bill for the purpose of amending the Managerial Act. I think there never was an Act which proved more of a damp squib than did the Act of last year known as the City and County Management (Amendment) Act.

Mr. O'Donnell

The Deputy can amend it now.

Mr. J. Brennan

I agree. It would need to be. The Act made no provision for this point. When listening to Deputy Desmond a while ago, I was wishing that he had made that speech on the passage of the Bill when it was before the House. To-night he deplored the system whereby a good deal of the direction and control of local authorities comes by way of circular from the Department in Dublin. I know the Department feel that unanimity in the matter of local administration is necessary and that a good deal of direction, with the right of approval of this, that and the other from the Custom House is necessary. At the same time, those of us who are members of local authorities very often feel that we are not regarded as being responsible local administrators, when we have to sit by and wait for direction from the top; and when we do suggest anything we have to get it vetoed or approved by the same central authority. I agree that at times and in some councils it is necessary, but I think we are inclined to move too far in that direction.

Before going from the over-all picture of local government as it is operating generally, I would like again to appeal to the Minister to set up a committee in his Department to examine the question of revaluation throughout the country.

Mr. O'Donnell

There was a Bill before this House once and it was dropped.

Mr. Loughman

As a contentious measure, during the war.

Mr. O'Donnell

It was no such thing; it was long after the war.

Mr. J. Brennan

I do not like to be interrupted too often by my colleague.

Mr. O'Donnell

I apologise.

Mr. J. Brennan

He was in the Minister's seat for the last few years and he felt the magnitude of the task too much to undertake. At least, he did not undertake that task, which I hoped he would. At the moment, the haphazard system of valuation leaves us in the position that some people are paying proportionately much greater towards local administration than others.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister is not responsible for the fixing of valuations.

Mr. J. Brennan

I am talking only in a general way on the question of revaluation. One could hardly discuss local administration to-day without in some way adverting to the question of the means by which funds are derived for local administration—namely, the rates.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am sure the Deputy could, if he tried.

Mr. J. Brennan

I would find it very hard. The whole system, as it at present depends on the local rate, is outmoded and obsolete. The Ministers responsible should jointly make an effort to ensure that the whole question is examined, with a view to its amendment at the earliest possible time, if we are to continue administering from local authorities the many schemes which are passed on from the various Departments in Dublin. The Departments of Health, Social Welfare and Local Government, practically every Department of State, are now passing on to local authorities the administration of new legislation. At the same time, the limitations of the managerial system do not give local administrators much scope in the administration of those schemes.

Passing from the general to the particular, I should like to refer to housing. I am not in agreement with all those who say that our housing problem is solved or almost solved. It is right to admit that we have reached a stage where the ribbon building of tenant houses in villages and towns may be nearing completion, or reaching saturation point. That is a debatable point. The history of housing in this country over the last decade is sad enough. We were being pressed at the time by every Minister to go full steam ahead. The boot was on the accelerator; then it went rapidly on the brake and we were suddenly told that we were reaching saturation point with regard to houses. The brake was jammed on and I am afraid the impact dislocated or unseated many workers at the time. In fact, I think it was contributory to unseating Deputy O'Donnell himself.

Mr. O'Donnell

How many towns in the Deputy's constituency require houses?

Mr. J. Brennan

Not many houses are required in towns. I am about to talk about rural housing in hamlets and townlands and I intend to say a few things on that subject. We in Donegal initiated one of the best schemes known in this country, when we embarked on the "specific instance cottage". It was a scheme under which the county council undertook to build a cottage for a smallholder up to a valuation of £5. We set that as a limit, with a view to raising the limit when it became necessary. We had many applications. The first venture went slowly, until we got into our stride, acquired the knack of putting through the acquisition of sites and so on, more expeditiously.

The first batch of 80 houses went rather slowly, but then we moved more rapidly. We gave a tenant a selection, a choice of the plans of three different houses. We said: "No. 1 would cost you approximately 10/– a week, No. 2, 12/6 and No. 3, 15/–; which are you having?" The applicant gave the site free. He completed the particulars on his form of application, they were duly investigated and, everything being found in conformity with the scheme outlined, a decision was taken to build his house. That house was subject to the terms of the Local Authorities (Cottage Purchase) Agreement, just the same as other cottages. He could have it consolidated with his holding in due course and could pay the rent together with his land annuities in one receivable order.

That scheme was going admirably until last June. There are yet in the Department of Local Government—unless they were released within the last few days—many applications for such houses. When the scheme was mooted, planned and approved of, each application was subject to approval by the Department of Local Government. There are proposals for the building of upwards of 100 houses.

Mr. O'Donnell

You could not get contractors for them.

Mr. J. Brennan

I ask the Deputy to remain quiet on this. I have the facts and they are not just in agreement with what he is saying. There are yet a large number of these proposals in the Department awaiting approval. Many of the applicants are young married couples with one or two children. They are living with their parents in an overcrowded house and they have been waiting for three years.

Mr. O'Donnell

Whisper to your colleague and he will release them— if they are there.

Mr. Smith

Were they held up?

Mr. J. Brennan

They are with the Department since June and I can give even the names of the applicants.

Mr. O'Donnell

Give the names of the contractors.

Mr. J. Brennan

I can give the contractors. Satisfactory tenders were submitted in respect of each applicant and we are satisfied that we got a good competitive price, yet no action was taken.

Mr. O'Donnell

Then the Deputy's colleague will release them in a few days.

Mr. Smith

I have promised to release in the course of the next few months the £1,000,000 worth which Deputy O'Donnell held up.

Mr. O'Donnell

Why not do it now? Why wait a few months?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is entitled to speak without interruption.

Mr. Smith

I wonder if the Donegal Deputies intend to hold the House, as the Cork Deputies did earlier to-day?

Mr. O'Donnell

As long as we have the buffer of County Cavan in between us, it will not be so bad.

Mr. Smith

Cavan is all right as a buffer—we will do that all right.

Mr. J. Brennan

There is nothing political in this. I have already spoken to the Minister and I am appealing to him now, using this House as a medium, to give the release of these applications his immediate consideration. It is a commendable scheme and one that merits better attention. If the local authority is satisfied that the four or five different contractors who have tendered for these houses have given a competitive price, then there is no reason whatever to hold them up. Until we have completed our work in that direction, we cannot say that our housing problem is by any means solved, and we can go on building under that scheme more and more houses over the next five years. By that scheme, in the Donegal congested areas, where the valuation is low, you will succeed in solving the rural slum problem which is very much with us still.

Many of the people who speak about emigration do not realise that young men who are brought up in poor thatched cabins, however respectable they may be, do not want to marry and settle down in houses where their parents and a few brothers and sisters are already living. They prefer to go to Birmingham or elsewhere, live in a flat and work for a week's pay rather than live under those conditions at home. One of the contributing factors to increased emigration from the congested areas—and I say this in all seriousness—is the lack of proper housing accommodation. I would like the Minister to keep that in mind in future in dealing with the type of houses necessary for the purpose of solving the rural slum problem.

The question of roads has already been pretty well covered by all the other speakers. I do not propose to repeat what has already been said, but I am glad that the Minister has come to the aid of the Road Fund to the extent of £900,000, even though it may have to be paid back over a number of years, to maintain the fund at the same level at which it would have been, had the Suez crisis not intervened to rob the fund of part of its revenue. I should say that, in addition to the Suez crisis, it was the Minister for Finance crisis which robbed us of £500,000 last year. Between Colonel Nasser and the Minister for Finance, the Road Fund was rather sorely depleted. It is indeed surprising that it was not more depleted, and I am surprised personally that £900,000 will bring it up to the level which we might have expected, had the fund been left intact.

Mr. O'Donnell

The extra 6d. a gallon on petrol will deplete it a little and the 20 per cent. increase in insurance.

Mr. J. Brennan

I am prepared to debate that with the Deputy any time.

Mr. Smith

Down in Donegal.

Mr. J. Brennan

Anywhere, at the crossroads or in the Dáil. However, I do congratulate the Minister on maintaining the same standard of grant as we had last year, in spite of the great difficulties he had to surmount, because local authorities are the greatest employers of labour in this country. Every pound voted for the roads programme, no matter what type of grant it may be, whether it is under the Employment Schemes Vote, the Local Authorities (Works) Act or the ordinary roads programme, it is a pound for the workers.

Mr. Larkin

The Deputy will agree the bulk of it is spent in this country.

Mr. J. Brennan

I do not see the point. It has always been spent in this country. I was anxious, and had advocated in the House some two or three years ago, that greater attention be paid to county roads, and the Minister saw fit to ignore my pleadings at that time.

Mr. O'Donnell

Certainly I did not.

Mr. J. Brennan

He brought in two Estimates in which he made no provision for any change in the system of the allocation of grants. Then suddenly, in the middle of the roads programme, he decided to divert the money from the schemes in progress to the county roads. However commendable that action might be in so far as concentrating extra money on county roads is concerned, the transition did not prove a very satisfactory one. Many workers were dislodged from their employment and on the whole the change worked out most unsatisfactorily.

Mr. Smith

The Deputy thinks there was a fly in the ointment?

Mr. J. Brennan

I am afraid things did not go according to plan anyhow.

Mr. O'Donnell

That was not the Minister's fault.

Mr. J. Brennan

But there was a something somewhere which seemed to undermine the obviously good purpose of the proposed transfer at the time. I agree with those people who say that our method of repairing bog roads is not a proper one. I do not know what can be done about it, but it is a problem which is receiving a good deal of consideration in every council. It is this problem of the maintenance of county roads, where some loose gravel is thrown into the pot-holes and next week the roads are as bad as ever. I have been advocating that light diesel rollers be used on this material, even though tar spraying or no other system is used. It is certainly a waste of money under our present system of traffic to have loose gravel thrown into pot-holes week after week, so that when you drive along that road again, it is as bad as it was before.

The day is gone when the heavy irons on cart wheels embedded that gravel into the road. The position is now completely changed. A fast heavy truck is driven along and even though the pot-holes have just been filled, it removes the gravel immediately and the water is there next day again. This problem will have to be overcome and I believe the best means of overcoming it would be to use the light roller. Even though the maintenance money would not go so far and the area covered would be smaller, the quantity of work done would be more satisfactory and more permanent, and the money would be better spent in the long run.

I would recommend the engineering officers of the Department, who meddle a great deal in many of our problems, to interest themselves in this more serious problem for a while. It is a problem which has baffled most councils up to the present and so far I do not think anyone has come forward with a real solution, which we would welcome if we could get it.

I do not want to go into the various other points I have noted here. There are many other Deputies who are anxious to speak and I would like to conclude on the note on which I started in regard to the growing burden of local administration. It is my opinion that it is out of proportion to the capabilities of the local administration to handle it.

Every new Act passed here imposes in some way or other an extra strain on local authorities. At the same time, local administrators are not entrusted with much by way of actual administration; the managerial hand is in every pie. I certainly agree with those who say that a few men meeting once a month would not be capable of administering the affairs of any county at the moment. I do not think anybody would approve of a return to the old system of complete autonomy for local authorities. I believe, however, that they should be more than just advisers.

Two years ago, I was at an international conference in Rome. It was a meeting of the I.U.L.A. Deputy Carroll was also present. One of the principal subjects discussed there was the question of fiscal autonomy in local administration. I was impressed when I discovered that practically every country in the world is struggling with the same problems as we have here— an increasing burden of local administration, rising rates, councils continuely begging subventions from the central Exchequer and objecting to these subventions being given under conditions, namely, on the basis that a contribution will also be made by the local authority.

I cannot see eye-to-eye and neither can I agree with those who advocate fiscal autonomy for local authorities. If we were to finance even a fraction of the work administered by local authorities at the present time out of rates alone, we would have to build extra workhouses to accommodate our ratepayers. I do not think anybody could visualise any such change, unless some of the work the councils are now administering were passed on to the central authority.

We have had speakers here year after year advocating that mental hospitals should become a charge on the central authority solely and that certain other sections of local administration should be taken over from local authorities. We shall have to be relieved of some of the burden in one way or another. We want a revision of valuations so that the burden of rates will fall more equitably on all, or we want the burden of work now foisted on local authorities curtailed and administered directly by the central authority. If that is not done, our local parliaments will become like the bodies in the cantons in Switzerland, but they will not have the necessary finances to meet the schemes they will want to administer.

Mr. Kyne

As a member of Waterford Corporation, I note with regret that we, perhaps the last surviving group of corporators who work a direct labour scheme, are this year limited in the number of houses to be erected. That limited number will not keep the workers unit group in continuous employment. We have been told that only a certain number of houses will be sanctioned. Our guild can compete with any contracting group in Waterford City or anywhere else. I appeal now to the Minister to examine the position and to give us enough money to keep that group in employment.

I am very well aware that the Minister is limited by the financial resources available to him. I am very well aware that there is not enough money to do all that he would wish to do, as there was not enough money for his predecessor to do all that he wished to do. This direct labour scheme has been in operation for the last eight to ten years and has proved its worth. The Minister should strain every nerve to keep that group employed, so that it will not be broken up and so that the workers will not leave Waterford. If the group is kept together, there will be certain advantages. People getting houses will have the advantage that they will get these houses at a lower cost because these workers make no profit, apart from their ordinary wages.

In Waterford County, we have been held back for some years in relation to rural cottage schemes. At one period we had something like 105 cottages. These were approved by all concerned and we proposed to raise the necessary money. On a subsequent revision, prior to the present Minister taking office, that number was reduced to roughly 54. Possibly economy reasons dictated that action. It is unfair to deprive people of cottages, unfair to deprive them because of the exigencies of a situation rather than on merit. They were not responsible for the exigencies of the situation. I admit that nobody can build without money, but, where people are entitled to housing by virtue of their economic conditions and where they cannot avail of grants, however tempting, every effort should be made, irrespective of economic conditions, to provide houses. Economies must not be made at the expense of the working man; at the end of his working day, he should at least be entitled to come home to a house capable of accommodating him, his wife and his children in comfort.

On the question of road grants, I would have had a good deal to say were it not for the Minister's reply to a question to-day. I appeal to him, however, to communicate to the various counties, as he promised to-day he would, what the final decision on the question of road grants is. In my own County of Waterford, at least 50 to 60 people were notified during the past three weeks that they were redundant not because there is no work for them, but because there is not enough money to pay them. I am not trying to lay that as a charge against the Minister. Perhaps it is as he says, that the money was not there or that they were not satisfied it was there because of the Road Fund position. It is true that because of petrol rationing and other matters, the position had to be examined.

The Minister indicated during Question Time to-day that he is willing and anxious to say to Waterford County Council to go ahead with their ordinary road work schemes and keep in employment the people whom they had kept employed in past years. He said that to-day, but I appeal to him to confirm that and to indicate to the Waterford County Council and other county councils what is the grant we are to get.

With regard to housing, I would say there has been a hold-up. There has definitely been a hold-up for one reason or another, under the last Government. For the past three years in my own urban area, we have been endeavouring to get a housing scheme going. At the present moment, it is with the Minister's Department. We have got the land and we need to go on with approximately 30, 40, 50 or perhaps 80 houses, but we are awaiting the appointment of an arbitrator. We can do no more than we have done. We sent the scheme to the Department prior to the present Minister taking up office. We sent it three or four months ago when the previous Minister was in office and we are still awaiting notification.

Will the Minister tell us he will appoint an arbitrator as quickly as possible? If the money is not there, let us know that; if he has not the money to do it, let him tell us that and we will understand. I appeal to the Minister not to have local authorities, of one of which I am chairman in my own constituency, held up to ridicule and accused of neglecting their work when it is a matter for the Department of Local Government.

I want to say in all honesty and without any intention of embarrassing the Minister that we in the local authorities are willing and anxious to try to carry out our duties and all we ask for is co-operation. We appeal to the Minister, in so far as he can within the amount of money which is permitted to him, to co-operate with us. I can assure him, as one who holds a different political belief from his, that in so far as he carries out his duties I, as one who has a certain amount of influence in my own local authority, will co-operate with him.

Mr. Carty

I agree with the previous speaker that local authorities should be notified as early as possible in the year with regard to the amount of grants to be given to them under the different headings—main roads, county roads and tourist roads. Most local authorities hold a preliminary road meeting in January. In my own county, the estimates meeting is held in February. At all times, we have to frame our estimate on the assumption that certain sums will be made available from the central authority by way of road grants. I think the Department of Local Government early in January each year should make a provisional allocation to each road authority and tell them the amount of money they are likely to receive. It would be a great help to the local authority and to the officials in preparing the estimates.

I hope the policy of the previous Minister with regard to the county roads will be followed by his successor and that a greater proportion of the available money will be diverted to the county roads. The county roads have been neglected over the years and more money should be spent on them. I think the decision made by Deputy O'Donnell, when he was Minister for Local Government, was a wise one and one which met with the approval of many members of local authorities.

I should like also to compliment the previous Minister on one good thing he did during the past 12 months, that is, the issuing of a booklet entitled "Rules of the Road". I regret very much that the booklet did not get a wider circulation. It was sent only to those who had applied for a driver's licence. I think it should have been sent to every household and that copies should have been sent also to the teachers in the national schools for distribution among pupils. It was an excellent booklet, well produced and well illustrated, and it was one that could properly be placed in the hands of the children.

I agree with Deputy Brennan when he said that local authorities were becoming very much like the Garda Síochána. The central authority are handing over to us—and I speak as a member of a local authority of 15 years' standing—different duties every year. Of course, they always dangle the carrot before us and say that, if we do this, the central authority will do something else. We are more or less intimidated into adopting schemes and making financial provision for them, schemes which should properly be within the jurisdiction of the central authority.

During the year, a scheme of that kind was put before us and we were asked for our co-operation. In fact, we were obliged to give it by the Minister for Local Government. That was the scheme in relation to sign-posting the roads. In my county, if we agreed to carry out that elaborate scheme and put up the statutory road signs, it would have cost the ratepayers about 3d. in the í. We decided to put up the signs we are obliged to put up on the main and county roads but spread the work over two or three years.

There is a lot of confusion with regard to these signs. In the past, the Automobile Association provided signs for many of our roads and then the Tourist Board or An Board Fáilte entered the field and now we have the local authorities competing with An Bord Fáilte and the Automobile Association. There are different signs and different terminology all over the country. You see the word "CrosBhóthar" or "Crosaire" and all the rest in two languages. You also have different signs pointing out the same thing. Uniformity is now the desire of the Department. We were told during the year that uniformity is fit and proper but I disagree that local authorities should be saddled with the expenditure.

I think, too, it would be wise if on our roads, especially our main roads carrying the bulk of our traffic, the main arterial roads out of Dublin to Cork, Galway, Limerick and other big centres, proper lay-bys were provided. Many users of these roads, especially drivers of heavy trucks going to and from Dublin with merchandise, oftentimes feel tired easily. They have long hours to work. Sometimes they have to meet boats at Dublin. Frequently they are on the roads for 11 or 12 hours at a time. Lay-bys are necessary, especially during the night when drivers get tired during a journey. Some provision should be made for the extension of the lay-by system all over the country. I noticed some of them on the Dublin-Naas road and on some roads to the South. In my view, local authorities should provide more lay-bys because they would prevent quite a considerable number of accidents on the road which occur as a result of drivers of of heavy vehicles getting tired after long journeys.

I come now to what I have always understood to be a very unjust and vexatious system, namely, motor taxation. I am not referring to motor taxation as such but to the tradesman who has to have a car to get to work in his own area or to people with small incomes who are not able to tax their car for the full year and are, therefore, obliged to tax them quarterly or half-yearly. These people are charged anything up to 20 per cent. more than the person who is better off and can pay the full year's tax at the one time. That is a most unjust imposition and it should be remedied. I do not think I am entitled to advocate legislation but I thought it might have been remedied during the past year.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister has no responsibility.

Mr. Carty

With respect, the local authority collects road taxation. I assume that officers of local authorities are under the control of the Minister for Local Government; maybe I am wrong.

I would also ask the Minister to remove the difficulties that exist in each county with regard to the appointment of engineers. In my county we have no county surveyor—we have not had one for the past two years. Some difficulties have arisen between the Department and the local authorities with regard to the salaries that should be paid to county surveyors, county engineers, assistant county engineers, and so forth.

Mr. Smith

Money would never be a difficulty between engineers and myself.

Mr. Carty

Whatever the difficulties are, I understand they are holding up the appointment of young engineers who desire employment in their own country. Such difficulties are causing young engineers to emigrate and take up positions elsewhere.

For a time here to-night I thought that the capital of Ireland was in Cork. For a solid hour I listened to Deputies from Cork County and City and one would imagine that nobody had any trouble but themselves. I wonder how they fight an election down there at all because each one supported the other. It seemed to me as if they were a mutual admiration society. Then, for another while, it almost seemed as if we would have to take the road to the Rosses. I can assure Deputies that we in Galway have our troubles, too.

The position as regards housing grants in Galway in the past 12 months was absolutely scandalous. No supplementary grant was paid since August last. Ther was also a complete hold-up of the issue of loans under the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Acts. Our manager told us that we had been promised this and that. We lived in sight of the land of promise for the past 12 months. Now that Deputy Smith is in charge of the Department of Local Government I hope that we shall not remain outside the promised land but that he will lead us into it as the Israelites were led into it according to the Old Testament.

I urge the Minister to give some definite directive in relation to supplementary housing grants. In Galway, we made certain provisions. We told the applicants that it was not necessary to apply immediately and that the last date for making application was around the end of April. We said that anybody who had been allocated a new housing grant or a reconstruction grant up to that date would qualify for a supplementary grant if the money were made available. I appeal to the Minister to tell us what dates he has in mind and whether he will make money available or allow moneys to be borrowed to pay grants up to the 31st December or the end of March—or whatever date he may select—so that the confusion which has existed for the past 12 months will disappear and the people will know once and for all where they stand.

With regard to housing schemes generally, I would ask the Minister to have a reassessment of the plans that local authorities are advised to adopt when preparing a housing scheme. I have noticed, in relation to my own area, that the plans which were approved were out of keeping with local conditions. In particular, I refer to the lay-out of some of these houses. We have had a big living-room and a very small kitchenette. Anyone who is familiar with conditions in rural Ireland must know that the important room is the kitchen and that that room should be big. They must also know that, generally speaking, people cannot provide two fires. I urge the Minister to get rid of the lunatic fringe of architects and engineers attached to the Department of Local Government who are out of touch with conditions in small towns and rural areas. They have been the cause of many mistakes in the past.

Another matter which has caused quite a lot of trouble is the hold-up in preparing vesting schemes for cottages. Time and time again, people have been encouraged to buy out their own houses. In County Galway, we had a scheme in respect of Board of Health cottages erected in pre-war days. I think, however, that we cannot prepare a vesting scheme for cottages built since 1937. I trust the Minister will be able to give us some direction on that matter.

I should like also to agree with some speakers who referred to decisions taken by an Association called the County Managers' Association. I shall now put a few questions to the Minister with regard to that Association. What statutory existence has it? Why are local authorities hamstrung by decisions taken by this group? Why can managers come and tell us they were in conference with officials of the Minister for Local Government and that they have taken this or that decision? These gauleiters should be got rid of. If they want to make any decisions, they should make them openly and with the approval of the local authority. We should not have the position that decisions are taken with regard to remuneration or conditions of service by this group who style themselves the County Managers' Association, the minutes of whose meetings are never supplied to members of local authorities and whose decisions we hear of only gy chance.

I wish the Minister every luck in his new position. I compliment him on his decision to honour his predecessor's debts with regard to the payment of supplementary housing grants. That has been a sore point with local authorities in the past 12 months. I hope that, with the advent of a new Minister, the matter will now finally be remedied.

Mr. Moloney

The first point to which I should like to refer is the existing scheme with regard to the employment allowance, abatement of rates on agricultural land. I think there is some hardship attached to the present position with regard to that allowance in so far as it refers to employed personnel on agricultural holdings. The existing scheme provides for abatement of rates in respect of members of the family, relatives within a certain category—employed on the rated holding. The main provision of the relief refers to the employment of labour on holdings, which is causing a good deal of hardship to many, if not all, who are owners of agricultural land.

The present regulations provide that there must be 52 weeks' continuous employment on the holding to qualify applicants for abatement, and I know in my county, and in every other county, that condition is such as to cause hardship to the ratepayer. There are many reasons why it is not practicable to have labour employed continuously the whole year round. The first reason is that farm workers are very reluctant to work a full year of 52 weeks, even allowing for the holidays they are now entitled to, according to existing legislation. In most parts of the country, I think Deputies will agree with me, the best a farmer can hope for is to get an agricultural worker to contract for a period of 10 to 11 months. That is becoming more difficult now in recent years. We have found, in our local authority in Kerry, some cases where prosecutions had to be instituted against applicants for employment allowances. They had to be instituted against such ratepayers because employment allowances were claimed for periods which when checked up did not turn out to be in accordance with the actual position.

I am not in the least condoning the alleged offences that are so committed, but I think the present system is, to some extent, influencing the commission of such offences. I would like to avail of this debate to-night to appeal to the Minister to consider a slight modification of the existing arrangement.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

If this modification would require legislation, the Deputy may not advocate it.

Mr. Moloney

I am assuming it would be possible for the Minister to devise some way other than legislation. I am not advocating legislation, but I am hoping some modification can be brought about or arrived at without having to go to the lengths of legislation and I hope the Minister will be able to throw some light on this subject.

I suggest-to come to the point—that under this category the period of employment should be reduced to ten months minimum and that the abatement should be proportionate, that is, that if the employed person works for ten months, it will be 10/12ths; if the period is 11 months, the abatement should be 11/12ths; and if the period is the full 12 months, then the existing allowance should apply in full. I feel that if there was any possibility that farm workers could be persuaded to work a full 12 months, as is the case in industry in general, it would be wrong to make this case; but I am perfectly satisfied from my own experience down the years that it is not possible to get agricultural workers to put in a full 12 months' period.

I know that weather and other conditions might make that a bit difficult, but in any event, I know many farmers who have tried it and it is only in a small proportion of cases that the workers will agree to work the full period. I think there is a very good case for the proposed revision, and I know local authorities throughout the country in many cases have from time to time sent resolutions to this effect to the Department. I understand it has been discussed at fairly high level, that is, at the General Council of County Councils. It has made recommendations on the lines I have suggested here to the Minister and sooner or later this matter will have to get attention on these lines, and I think the present time is very opportune. So much for that.

I shall pass on to the question of road grants. I think the change in the system of allocating road grants this year has been somewhat detrimental to the progress of work on roads throughout the country. In previous years, we were always accustomed to get notification from the Department as to the total amount of the allocation from the various funds for the maintenance, repair and construction of roads under the local authority. This year, for some reason that perhaps can be explained later, we were advised of an interim allocation and we were asked to make out our proposals which had to come to the Department for sanction.

In my county, we proceeded with all haste to make out those proposals and they were sent to the Minister's Department in accordance with the directions given. We find now in a number of cases, some of these proposals have not been accepted and have been referred back to the local authority again. Attention has been drawn to the fact that allocations have been made to roads, not on the five-year plan, at least not on the roads sanctioned on the five-year plan. There were some roads undoubtedly brought into the five-year plan in 1956, and as far as I can understand, these were accepted in principle at the time. In any event, sanction was then given to start work on steamrolling, and in fact, stretches of the roads in question, were commenced and steamrolled last year.

The proposals which came up to the Minister's Department, which were for approval on the interim allocation last year, referred to some of these roads, and it is rather hard to understand now why the roads in question should not be sanctioned for continuance of work. I appeal to the Minister to reconsider his attitude in connection with these allocations, because local authorities are now somewhat committed, by virtue of having started on the works a year or so ago, and to allow the local authorities to continue with the construction and steamrolling of those roads.

Reference was made here this evening to the proposal of the previous Government to discontinue the steamrolling of certain main roads and to switch the moneys allocated to these roads to by-roads. I do not know what is the general opinion of Deputies here who are members of local authorities, but in my county that proposal was premature because we still have quite a good mileage of main roads—roads classified as main—which have not been steamrolled and at the time that the switch was suggested, the local authority unanimously rejected the proposal and in due course was able to persuade the Minister to agree to allow the position to remain as it was. We were then able to continue the steamrolling of certain main roads. These are main roads of lesser importance, but they are classified as main roads and, as such, are more entitled to steamrolling than county roads which, undoubtedly, are not as important, irrespective of what traffic they may carry.

The present policy of steamrolling county roads on a five-year plan is a very good arrangement because it enables the local authority to plan ahead on a very definite basis. It also enables the Department to curb any irresponsible scheme that might be proposed under that heading. The only trouble is that quite a number of roads are put on the five-year plan and the present system of scheduling those roads is somewhat loose and indefinite. A halt should be called and no more roads should be placed on the plan until such time as the roads already scheduled have been finished. In that way, it will be possible to complete long stretches of roads which have been commenced but which are not being proceeded with as quickly as the local authority would wish.

There is just one final point I should like to make, in connection with the provision of rural water supplies. I hope that properly comes under the direction of the Minister for Local Government. It is a matter that is very desirable and urgent. The record of local authorities with regard to the provision of water supplies in urban areas is reasonably creditable. I am referring now to rural areas. The existing arrangement is that pumps are provided at crossroads or central points to supply the population of the district. These pumps are usually provided only after very careful examination by the county medical officer of health and on his recommendation that a pump is necessary in a particular case.

Considerable difficulty is sometimes experienced by the engineering department of the councils in providing a satisfactory and certain supply of water for those pumps. A good deal of money has been spent on them, very often with poor results. Many pumps have been provided within the past 15 years, but the demand for pumps still persists and is very noticeable.

The amount of expenditure on pumps is not always justified. While I realise the difficulty of providing the necessary money for a bigger scheme, nevertheless the Minister would be justified in considering the practicability of providing regional water schemes. There is one thing to be said at the outset in favour of such schemes, that the people for whom they are provided are prepared to pay economic rents and such schemes could be described as schemes that will give an immediate return to the Exchequer for any money expended on them.

Since the advent of rural electrification, the people have become conscious of the value of running water, just as they are conscious of the value of electricity. The rural community would welcome water supplies and would be prepared to go a long way in paying whatever is the economic charge therefor. I understand that experiments have been carried out in a few centres during the past few years, the results of which have been very satisfactory. I respectfully suggest to the Minister that, as soon as possible, he should ask the engineering section of his Department to examine this very important matter and that experiments should be carried out in every county. Two areas at least in every county should be selected for the provision of rural water supplies.

The general experience in most counties is that there is an abundant supply of water which is going to waste. With the very fine engineering service now available through the Minister's Department and the local authorities, it should be possible to formulate a standard scheme for the purpose of providing water for the people in rural areas. The people in urban areas have such amenities and at very reasonable cost. The country districts also are entitled to this facility. The provision of these amenities is vital if we are to be consistent in our efforts to keep people on the land, where there is a shortage of labour, particularly for domestic purposes. I am sure the housewives of rural districts would welcome and encourage schemes for the supply of water to their homes.

I do not suggest that the Minister could be expected to install a water supply in all the houses in the same way as the E.S.B. were able to bring electricity to every house. I do think that the water could be trapped and conveyed through mains to the principal centres of population in rural areas and, with the grants, which I hope will be reintroduced for the provision of water schemes in the homes, the householders could be very easily encouraged to tap the mains and bring the water into the homes. I am quite sure the Minister will examine that suggestion as soon as he can get time to do so, and I sincerely hope that when the Estimate for the Minister's Department comes before the House again in 12 months' time, some progress in that sphere will have been recorded.

I should now like to deal with the appointment of rate collectors in general. We are not concerned with that matter in County Kerry because we happen to have a direct system of rate collection, but one thing that struck me as being very unfair under the County Management Act is that county councillors and, as far as I know, urban councillors, are deprived of any power except one, that is, to appoint rate collectors. The time has arrived when rate collectors could best be appointed through the Local Appointments Commission, or at least through some system other than asking the unfortunate councillors to try to decide who is the most suitable for such a position, and I am sure most members of local authorities would welcome that change.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Legislation would be required to carry out that change.

Mr. Moloney

I did not appreciate that. That being so, I will have to be content to leave the matter at that at the moment and raise it in another way at a later date.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 14th May, 1957.