asked the Minister for Defence if he will state the number of employees in each military establishment in County Kildare who have received notice of dismissal since the 21st March last; the number of persons whose employment will be terminated on next Friday; and whether he will provide the necessary funds to ensure the retention in employment of those under notice and the re-employment of those recently dismissed.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Employees in Kildare Military Establishments.
The number of employees in each military establishment in County Kildare who have received notice of dismissal due to redundancy since the 21st March last and whose notice has expired is as follows:—
|
Curragh Camp |
18 |
|
Devoy Barracks, Naas |
8 |
|
Dún Mhig Aoidh, Kildare |
Nil. |
The number of persons who have been given notice of dismissal to expire on next Saturday is 32. These are all employed at the Curragh Camp.
As I have informed the Deputy in reply to a recent question on the same subject the redundancy has occurred because the programme of works planned by the previous Government for the current financial year and the amount of money provided for these works does not provide for employment on the same scale as last year. As the Deputy is aware the Estimate for Defence for the current financial year has already been passed by the Dáil.
I have made inquiries as to whether there are any schemes prepared in my Department, which if brought forward, would keep these men in employment and have been informed that there are not. In view of the fact that the plans for schemes to keep these men in employment were not prepared there is no point in asking the Dáil to provide additional funds for this purpose.
Is the Minister aware that the Government at a meeting which was held in July, 1956, decided that the persons then employed in the Curragh Camp should be retained in employment and that work should be provided for them in order to avoid any pay-off, through redundancy or otherwise? Having regard to the fact that there would be no alternative local employment for the men who are now under notice and that he has agreed to receive a deputation from the trade unions concerned to-morrow, would the Minister, at least as a temporary measure, suspend the present dismissals until he hears the case which will be put to him by the trade unions to show that useful maintenance work can be carried on in the Curragh Camp and thus prevent a deterioration in valuable State property?
I have looked into this matter from the moment I took office and I am assured by the people concerned that there is no work at present available for these men, no work on which these people could be usefully employed. Such work was not provided for during the previous Government's period of office; neither was any provision made in the Estimates for money with which to pay these people. The money provided in the Estimates prepared by the last Government is not sufficient to maintain employment at the same level, or anything like it.
If a case can be put to the Minister by the trade unions concerned showing that the pay-off of these men will result in a deterioration in the maintenance of valuable State property and remembering that these men would be entitled to draw £3 1s. per week from the local employment exchange, whilst doing nothing, when useful employment could be provided for them in the Curragh Camp, would he not agree to suspend the dismissal notice for at least a week in order that he may hear the other point of view? There would be very little loss to public funds in the meantime. In view of the fact that every one of these men will draw £3 1s. per week from the Department of Social Welfare, surely the case has some economic basis as well.
I have so far not discovered any useful work on which these men could be employed in the Department, and I have made every effort to find it. No plans are in existence in the Department for work on which these men could be employed. That is the position.
May I make one last plea? May I urge him not to close his mind on the question as to whether additional work can or cannot be provided until such time as he hears the deputation which, I understand, he has agreed to receive to-morrow?
If work can be found, either as a result of the deputation, or for any other reason, the men can be re-employed on Monday. But I certainly have failed to find work after making most exhaustive inquiries in the Department.
No provision was made. That was a saving decision of the last Government.
Would the Minister produce to-morrow when the deputation attends on him a schedule of the works prepared this time last year?
I have the schedule of works.
Why did the Deputy not provide for it in the Estimates?
The Minister's Government is giving £250,000 to the master bakers.
I did make provision and this is part of the £100,000 that the Minister's Government is cutting off the Estimate.
Deputy Sweetman was Minister for Finance.
He was, and the Minister is cutting £100,000 off the amount I provided.
Can the Minister not give that to these men now as well as to the master bakers?
The big pay-off.
£100,000 would meet it.
There were 100,000 jobs in the plans that were there.