Vol. 181 No. 9
Tairgim:—
Go ndeonófar suim nach mó ná £306,550 chun slánaithe na suime is gá chun íochtha an mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31ú lá de Mhárta, 1961, le haghaidh Tuarastail agus Costais, Oifig na hOibreacha Poiblí (1 & 2 Will. 4, c.33, ailt 5 agus 6; 5 & 6 Vict., c.89, ailt 1 agus 2; 9 & 10 Vict., c.86, ailt 2, 7 agus 9; etc.).
I propose to follow the practice of previous years by taking Votes 8 and 9 together.
Vote 8 bears the salaries and expenses of the administrative, executive and technical staffs of the Office of Public Works which is the office responsible for the administration of Vote 9.
Vote 9 provides the necessary funds for the purchase of sites and buildings for State purposes; for the erection, maintenance and furnishing of Government offices and other State-owned premises; for the erection and improvement of national schools and Garda stations; for the erection of major military buildings; for arterial drainage and other engineering works; for the maintenance of State-owned parks and State harbours and for a number of other activities.
There is a net increase of £30,800 in the Estimate for the Office of Public Works compared with the total of the sums voted for 1959/60. Subhead A, which bears the cost of Salaries, Wages and Allowances, shows a net increase of £31,850. This is due to the recent general increases in remuneration. The office establishment is slightly reduced and there had been some reorganisation of the higher posts. The increase under this Subhead and a minor increase of £300 under Subhead D—Telegrams, Telephones and Postage—arising from extensions of the telephone service of the office are offset to a small extent by a decrease of £1,350 under Subhead C—Incidental Expenses—resulting from a reduction in engineering technical equipment requirements and some economies in advertising. There is no change in the estimate of Appropriations in Aid.
The Estimate of £4,224,000 for Public Works and Buildings—Vote 9 —shows a net increase of £135,130 on the Estimate for 1959/60. This is accounted for by an increase in estimated expenditure of £156,270 partly offset by an increase of £21,140 in the amount expected to be realised from Appropriations in Aid.
The principal increases in expenditure are £60,000 under Subhead B— New Works, Alterations and Additions; £30,870 under Subhead C— Maintenance and Supplies; £115,000 under Subhead J.2—Arterial Drainage—Construction Works; and £15,000 under Subhead J.5—Arterial Drainage and Maintenance.
Subhead A—Purchase of Sites and Buildings—shows an increase of £4,000 in respect of purchases of miscellaneous sites and premises.
Deputies will have already received a statement showing the various amounts making up the bulk provision for Subhead B and it is unnecessary for me to go into detail. A few items, however, merit special mention.
Last year, £1,600,000 was provided for national schools and this year we are asking for the same amount— Item 44. As stated by my predecessors, the replacement and improvement of defective school buildings is a most important feature in our work. Over 700 schools require to be replaced and major schemes of improvement or extension are required for about 300 others. Serious efforts to increase building output have been made and are being continued. As the Minister for the Gaeltacht said here last year, 92 new schools and 62 major improvement schemes were completed in the year 1958-59. The figures for the year 1959-60 were 85 and 51 respectively. This does not mean any falling off in the work. The figures do not represent the full amount of work in hands during the year but only the number of works which happen to have reached completion within the year. Some of these may have been in hands the previous year or the year before that. For example, last year 85 new schools are recorded as completed: at the beginning of the year work was in hands on 111 new schools and on 102 at the end of the year. The best indication of the amount of work done is the expenditure, which last year was approximately £1,543,000, the highest yet recorded. We hope to do as well this year.
There is a provision of £100,000 for work on Major Fishery Harbours— Item 55. As the House is aware, the Government brought in an eminent Swedish consulting engineer to advise on these matters and his report has been received by the Minister for Lands. It is not for me to intrude on that because no doubt it will be mentioned on his Estimate. It has already been decided to proceed with some of the recommendations and this provision is in the nature of a first instalment to cover the work which is expected to be carried out this year at Killybegs and Greencastle.
It will be noted that a provision of £20,000 has been included for expenditure on the projected Garden of Remembrance at Parnell Square —Item 21—for which tenders have been received and on which it is hoped to commence work shortly. The cost of the project will be substantially higher than had been originally anticipated but I feel sure that nobody will quibble at the expense of providing this long overdue Memorial in the centre of our capital city, to all those who gave their lives in the cause of Irish Freedom.
As Deputies are already aware it has been decided, subject to certain conditions, to hand over Kilmainham Gaol—Item No. 22—to a Board of Trustees who intend to carry out a scheme for the restoration of the premises and the establishment there of an historical museum. It is proposed to have the work done by voluntary workers and I trust that those responsible will receive the fullest possible support from the public in the execution of the project.
There is one other matter to which I might perhaps refer at this stage although no provision in respect of it is included in the Subhead this year. It has for long been recognised by all Parties in the House that the accommodation and general facilities for Ministers and the members and staff of the Houses of the Oireachtas are altogether inadequate and it is imperative that something should be done about the matter. During the past year the problem has been examined by an InterDepartmental Committee and their recommendation, which has been accepted by the Government, is that the only practical way in which the situation can be eased is by the erection of a new building here alongside the Natural History Musuem as an extension of Leinster House. A certain amount of preliminary planning has already been done by the architects in the Office of Public Works but it will be about a year before actual building operations can commence.
The provision of £6,000 under Subhead BB—Coast Protection—is for the continuance of the survey and experimental works in connection with the coast erosion problem at Rosslare Strand.
The increase of £30,870 under Subhead C—Maintenance and Supplies— is mainly due to wage increases granted to workers in the building trade.
The provision for Furniture, Fittings and Utensils, Subhead D.1., is little changed, and that for the Central Furniture Stores, Subhead D.2, is the same as before. A reduction of £8,000 under Subhead E—Rents, Rates, etc., is attributable to the inclusion in last year's estimate of some exceptional provisions and non-recurrent charges in respect of premises abroad. The small decrease under Subhead F and the provisions for the minor Subheads G, H.1 and I, scarcely call for comment.
The provision of £15,000 under Subhead H.2—River Shannon Navigation (Grant-in-Aid), is required to make good an anticipated deficit in the Shannon Navigation Fund Account which, despite staff economies and reduced incidence of maintenance, shows an increase of £4,500. This increase in the estimated deficit is due to the reduction in C.I.E. traffic on the Grand Canal system and the Navigation.
There is a reduction of £2,000 in the provision for Subhead J.1—Arterial Drainage Surveys. This does not mean that there is any diminution in the arterial drainage survey programme but is due to the fact that the outdoor work on the special preliminary investigations in connection with the River Shannon flood problem is almost completed. We hope to have the engineering report available for consideration about the end of the year.
Deputies will notice a substantial increase—£115,000—for arterial drainage construction works under Subhead J.2. It was decided in 1958 that the programme should be accelerated as far as practicable having regard to the availability of technical staff, labour and machinery, and the provision for 1960-61 continues that trend. In the programme drawn up some 15 years ago for the purposes of the 1945 Act there are 28 major catchments and 30 minor catchments. Progress in the beginning was necessarily slow as an organisation had to be built up: engineers had to be recruited, plant acquired and a central workshop and stores established. This has now been done and we can look forward to an increased volume of work in future years. Of the 28 major catchments, schemes for three have been completed, works are in progress in three others, and seven more are at various stages of survey and design. Two minor schemes have been finished, one is in hands and four are at the survey or design stage. This is a big bite out of the listed programme and I think Deputies will agree that we are now well launched on the project.
It was decided recently to extend activities still further by bringing within the scope of the 1945 Act what, for want of a better term, have been called "intermediate rivers". By these are meant the smaller independent catchments with clear outfalls which were not included in the original lists. When arrangements get under way we hope to have works on four of these catchments in hands each year. Surveys of the first group are in progress and work will be begun as soon as we can. It is perhaps no harm to impress on Deputies that this new arrangement does not indicate that any piece-meal work will be undertaken. The areas dealt with which will be treated as a whole must be independent catchment areas and must not form part of any larger catchment already listed in the main programme.
In Subhead J.2 provision is made for all the schemes featured in last year's Estimate except the Feale which has been completed. The Corrib-Clare scheme is past its peak and the provision is reduced by £45,000. Work is expanding on the Maine and the Ballyteige and Kilmore schemes as well as on the Fergus Embankments scheme, which last year was covered by the provision for Additional Minor Schemes. The sums provided for the Moy and Inny schemes show increases of £50,000 and £55,000 respectively as this year they are intended to cover almost a full year's work. We hope that the £15,000 under the heading "Additional Minor Schemes" will be needed for work on the Killimor, Co. Galway and Broadmeadow, Counties Dublin and Meath, which we expect to reach the works stage later in the year. In respect of the Nenagh, Clareen and Bunratty-Rineanna schemes, provisions of only £2,000 in all, are required, as certificates of completion are expected to issue shortly.
Subhead J. 5—Arterial Drainage: Maintenance, covers the estimated expenditure on maintenance of the schemes already completed as well as the Nenagh, Clareen and Bunratty-Rineanna Schemes which are expected to come under maintenance in 1960/61. The expenditure under this Subhead is recoverable from the County Councils concerned.
Plant released from the Corrib-Clare drainage scheme will be available for use on other schemes and, accordingly, it is possible to make a reduction of £62,000 under Subhead K—Purchase and Maintenance of Plant and Machinery, and Stores.
An increase of £21,140 in Appropriations-in-Aid is due principally to an increase in recoupments in respect of the outlay on drainage maintenance as two additional drainage works, the Feale drainage scheme and the Owenogarney river embankments, were completed in 1959, and to estimated receipts, previously surrendered to the Exchequer, from sales of property. The principal decrease is in receipts from hire of plant for drainage works financed from the National Development Fund.
That is a factual statement and without being unduly wordy, I have tried to cover the activities of my office as adequately as possible. If Deputies in the course of the debate wish me to elaborate, to elucidate or to refer to some activities of my office which may not have been mentioned in the statement, I shall be only too glad to do my best to give them whatever information they may require.
I move:
"That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration."
At the outset, I am handicapped in that I cannot take this Estimate with what I call my usual style, as I should find it very hard to be tough on the Parliamentary Secretary. I think this is his first Vote and I am very grateful to him for supplying me with a copy of his statement. I wish him the very best of luck in his office.
To a Deputy, the Office of Public Works is a mystery. To the people down the country, it is a Never-Never Land. People seldom know how things happen or are initiated in the Office of Public Works. There is always what I could describe as a fait accompli in connection with schemes. I should like to know how these schemes are initiated. Is it possible for Deputies, the people or local authorities to bring pressure on the Parliamentary Secretary and the Office of Public Works or to direct them?
Last year, when I moved to refer the Estimate back, I mentioned arterial drainage and I was nearly trampled to death by the speakers who followed me. They completely misunderstood me. I mentioned then, and I make no apology for mentioning now, arterial drainage. Under Subhead J.2. the total estimate is from £10,000,000 to £11,000,000. The Deputies who did not agree with me last year were concerned with their constituencies and should be sufficiently tolerant to realise that I should be concerned with mine. It is a great thing to have big schemes in progress, not in various parts of the country, but in just one part. It is extraordinary that I can never see great schemes, or even small schemes, in my part of the country. I can justify that statement.
If a local authority or a statutory board in the constituency of Waterford puts up a proposition involving thousands of pounds to the Office of Public Works or any Government Department, they are met with shudders and the matter is usually brought to the local Deputies. The Deputies for Waterford and the people of Waterford then see that even though they were turned down in respect of a scheme that would cost some thousands of pounds, millions of pounds can be spent in other places.
During the course of the debate on the Adjournment on 6th April, 1960, the Parliamentary Secretary said— Volume 180, No. 13, column 1963 of the Official Report:
It would not be fair to withdraw the survey staff from the other catchments on the priority list and send them back to do further work in Galway. They must wait until such time as the other schemes on the priority list have been completed.
I should be grateful if the Parliamentary Secretary were to make the priority list available.
As far as arterial drainage is concerned, it was said that there would be a survey of the River Suir in 1960. This is 1960 and I should like to know from the Parliamentary Secretary if the survey of the Suir has commenced and, if so, if he can give me some idea as to how far it has gone and when the report will be available.
Last year, I referred to the fact that some flooding had taken place at our own door, in the courtyard of Leinster House. I want to thank the Parliamentary Secretary or his predecessor, and the Office of Public Works, for the prompt manner in which the matter was dealt with.
A list of new works, alternations and additions under Subhead B. has been circulated. Item No. 2 on that list is Leinster House—extension of indicator board system. Does that mean we are to have the new closed circuit TV installed this year?
I did not mention anything about TV.
I am not very anxious to have it, to tell the truth. It was just a matter of curiosity.
It might arise in another Vote.
It says "Extension of indicator board system" and I thought it might include TV., that it would be a new type of indicator board.
Item No. 4 is "State Apartments— restoration of burnt-out drawing rooms." The total estimated cost is £104,000; the provision is £500. It would appear that we are not going on with that at present.
Item No. 5 is "Busts and portraits of national leaders." I should be grateful to the Parliamentary Secretary if he would state the national leaders of whom we have acquired portraits and busts.
Item No. 9 is "Office of Public Works: New central furniture stores and workshops—adaptations." The total estimated cost is £25,000. As a result of the way in which the Office of Public Works operate, it could be regarded as Never-Never Land; nobody knows anything about it or where it is; but I have to compliment the officials for their work and their furnishing of Government offices. There is a tradition of buying real furniture. That tradition has been carried on. The Office of Public Works furnish Government offices magnificently and with great taste and I should like to compliment the officials, through the Parliamentary Secretary.
Item No. 15 is "Revenue Commissioners, Dublin Castle—rebuilding of cross block" The total estimated cost is £85,000 and the provision this year is £6,000. Apparently, they are not taking that seriously, either.
Item No. 20 is "Kilmainham Gaol —Treatment of 1916 Plot." The total estimated cost is £3,500; the provision is £3,000. I welcome that provision, and I am sure that its restoration or its preservation will be well done, because the people who look after our ancient monuments in the Office of Public Works know their business.
There is a provision of £126,500 in item 23—"Dún Laoghaire Harbour: Mail Boat Pier—Improvements." This is one of the jealousies I have, that there are only certain piers and certain places on which the Office of Public Works will spend big money. Big money has been spent in the west on arterial drainage and the only places that get an estimate of £126,000 are in the east. I am not antagonistic to the west. Western Deputies are very loyal to their constituencies but surely they will afford me the toleration I give to them, that I have the right to speak here for my own constituency.
The total Estimate for Johnstown Castle has been dealt with. Great work has been done there. I notice that my own constituency is mentioned in this document and that £3,000 has been provided for the bovine tuberculosis offices in Waterford. Thank God for small mercies.
The provision for national schools grants, No. 44 in this document, is £1,600,000—the same as last year. I do not know whether this is a matter for the Office of Public Works or the Department of Education, but I suppose they could get together on it: I hope when they are building schools in the future they will build them where the pupils are, or at least give priority to the areas where there is overcrowding.
Nos. 48 and 49 deal with the National Library and the National Museum, and I shall take them together. We have all at times attended functions where people got very starry-eyed, sucked their breaths through their teeth and told us all about our culture and our national heritage. I have travelled around Ireland seeking this culture all my lifetime and I have been disappointed. So far as our national heritage is concerned, the most tangible things I came across are in the National Museum, the National Library and the National Gallery. I have said that many times and I hope I shall not have to repeat it again. I commend to the Parliamentary Secretary this great work. No opportunity should be lost at any time to ensure that if buildings become available in the vicinity of any of these three great institutions, they are made available to them.
Let us take the National Library first. The storage position there has become practically impossible. It is only because of the dedicated men and the fine staff they have there that they are able to carry on at all. The same could be said of the National Museum with its crammed cellars. So far as the National Gallery is concerned, I do not think there is any proper up-to-date inventory of its contents. It is not possible to see a great treasure, or a collection of great treasures without giving notice because what you wanted to see might be in a corner of a room which was crammed with other pictures and other treasures.
I wonder would the Parliamentary Secretary be the person responsible for that matter.
He will have to find a place for them anyway and he will have to build, if that decision is taken. I commend this problem, or these three problems, to the Parliamentary Secretary and the Office of Public Works, and I hope if we are all alive, please God, we shall have the opportunity of complimenting him for solving them.
In regard to major fishery harbours, the total estimated cost has not yet been decided. The Parliamentary Secretary said this morning:—
It has already been decided to proceed with some of the recommendations and this provision is in the nature of a first instalment to cover the work which is expected to be carried out this year at Killybegs and Greencastle.
I have consistently reminded this House that there is such a place as Dunmore East. There is there a pier for which the Office of Public Works have responsibility. If I may be allowed to say so, I have seen more fish landed there in one day than have been landed on piers in this State in a whole season. I have read newspaper clippings which said that so many cran of herring were landed at such and such a place during the season and that it was not as good as it could possibly have been, but nearly £100,000 was spent on it. Surely a place like Dunmore East, where we can land up to 4,000 cran of herring in a day during the season, is entitled to consideration. There are many stores there which should be rehabilitated and the pier could easily be widened by the removal of many of them.
The decision to carry out these repairs would not rest with the Parliamentary Secretary. It is the responsibility of the Minister in charge of Fisheries.
I know the Parliamentary Secretary will take this in good part and I know, if you will excuse me, sir, you will take it in good part yourself. I cannot help being jealous of Killybegs. I notice the hangar gates at Baldonnel are a bit of a luxury at £32,000.
Not to think of the luxury of the jet planes.
A scheme was put up to another Department which will I suppose come up soon to the Parliamentary Secretary. I refer to the drainage of Kilbarry Bog and the river running out of it, St. John's River. That would come under the arterial drainage scheme. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will give it his blessing.
Another place that seems to be unlucky in the matter of Government grants or any Government interest at all is the resort of Tramore. The foreshore there was very badly damaged by the winter gales. I put down a Question to the Parliamentary Secretary asking if the Office of Public Works would be prepared to take any steps to have this matter remedied and to have a survey made. He told me that no proposition had been put to him by the local authority. I am quite sure that a proposition will be put to him by the local authority. He has the precedent already. I hope he will treat Tramore as lie treated Rosslare Strand, which was being ruined. I am glad a grant of £6,000 was given towards the cost of a survey and experimental works at Rosslare Strand. That seems a fabulous amount of money to us down in the south-east of Ireland to get from a Government Department. It is only chickenfeed to other counties.
It is unnecessary for Deputies from other constituencies who speak after me to give me the scarifying I got last year just because I mentioned arterial drainage in the west. I hope that when the Parliamentary Secretary reads his priority list, he will be able to tell us that the survey is being made on the River Suir, that we shall see arterial drainage on that river and in the fine lands of county Waterford, county Kilkenny, county Tipperary and up into the Golden Vale and that it will be started within the next few years.
I am grateful for the copy of the statement. I wish the Parliamentary Secretary a very successful term of office.
Like the previous speaker, I also should like to wish the new Parliamentary Secretary well in his capacity as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance. When a new Minister or a new Parliamentary Secretary takes office, we all hope that there will be improvements and, in the case of the Office of Public Works, that more work will be carried out. The Parliamentary Secretary is hamstrung from the word "go" because he has a limited amount of money to spend this year to do a certain amount of work.
Frankly, I am disappointed that the money provided by the Government for Public Works and Buildings has not increased beyond £135,130. In view of increased costs, in view of increased wages, how better can the Parliamentary Secretary do this year than, say, was done last year? Nobody wants work merely for the sake of providing work as such. The emphasis in recent years has been on productive employment. The Government from time to time, especially the Taoiseach, stated that money will be freely available for work which is productive or which will advance or improve the general economy and wellbeing of the country.
I propose to make a few remarks on the amount provided for national schools. The Parliamentary Secretary says that last year £1,600,000 was provided for national schools and this year we are providing the same amount. Why does the Parliamentary Secretary not ask the Dáil for a larger amount? I think he would be justified in asking for it. I think the Government would be justified in giving him a larger amount, especially when we have regard to the need for more schools, which is admitted by the Parliamentary Secretary, and to the fact that there are so many skilled and unskilled building operatives in the country who need employment.
Over the years some Governments have been reasonably generous in the provision of money for houses. It has been stated that we do not need the same activity in the building of houses now as we did, say, a certain number of years ago. If there is not now the same need for houses in certain parts of the country as there was at one time, there is a need for more national schools and, in the words of the Parliamentary Secretary, over 700 schools require to be replaced. We are not providing the same amount of money for house building as we did some years ago. Therefore, money that is not now required for house building could surely be devoted to the building of much-needed schools. I do not think anybody could argue that that would not be of direct or indirect benefit to the general economy and the general well being of the country.
I cannot see how the Parliamentary Secretary can say that the same amount of work in the building and repair of national schools will be engaged in this year as last year and the year before. The Parliamentary Secretary must have regard to the fact that the price of materials has increased and that there has been another increase in wages. If in the last financial year, 1959-60, 85 new schools were completed and 51 were approved how can he hope to do the same this year? Last year was not as good a year for the building of schools as was the previous year, according to what the Parliamentary Secretary told us in his statements. How then with the same amount of money can he do the same amount of work this year? As I said, employment is needed for building workers who have been laid off from building houses and they could well be put on to the building of schools.
Another point to which I want to refer, and which has been referred to many times, is the abnormal delay in the commencement of the building of schools. The acquisition of the land, the planning of the school, the innumerable changes made in plans, the discussions which take place between the Department of Education, the Board of Works and the manager, sometimes take up to ten years before the commencement of the building of the school. The Parliamentary Secretary with the limited amount at his disposal could do something in that respect which would short-circuit all these preliminaries which take place before the actual building of the school gets under way.
To their credit let it be said that those who propose to build factories do not seem to have the same difficulties about the acquisition of the site, the transfer of title and the finalising of plans and all that sort of thing. If a school is to be built, all these preliminaries could be gone through in a much shorter time in order to have the actual building commenced as soon as possible.
The Parliamentary Secretary also referred to the development of major fishery harbours and to the fact that a Swedish consultant engineer advised and reported to the Government on the general question of the development of major fishery harbours. I do not know whether or not it is a matter for the Parliamentary Secretary but, if it is, perhaps he would tell us if the Government have now decided which of the harbours around our coast are regarded as major fishery harbours. Could he at this stage give us an idea of what harbours are to be developed? I remember six or seven years ago when a survey was carried out and it was the intention of the Government at the time—I think it was the inter-Party Government—to designate certain harbours as major fishery harbours and to develop them to such an extent that they would be capable of catering for the fleets.
That is a matter for Fisheries.
For the Minister for Lands. I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to give us a little more detail about the handing over and restoration of Kilmainham Jail. I raise this matter because the Parliamentary Secretary has not given us details. He said that Kilmainham Jail is to be handed over to a Board of Trustees who intend to carry out a scheme for its restoration and to make it into an historical museum. He said: "It is proposed to have the work done by voluntary workers." Let us hear more from the Parliamentary Secretary about the voluntary workers. There were some schemes initiated around the country which were to be carried out by voluntary workers. I am always suspicious of work done by voluntary workers.
We have a suggestion that in the matter of forestry many people should band themselves together as voluntary workers. That could be dangerous for the ordinary worker who is now unemployed and I would hate to see a Local Government official, a civil servant, a member of the armed Forces or the Garda Síochána engaging in that sort of voluntary work to the detriment of people who are unemployed. I do not know whether or not it is the case in this instance, but, perhaps, the Parliamentary Secretary could enlighten us on it. If that sort of position were to prevail we might have a situation in which voluntary workers could be people doing work for nothing on which the Civil Service are now engaged. The Civil Service would not like that, so let us hear more about these voluntary workers who propose to restore Kilmainham Jail. I make my remarks without prejudice until we hear a little more from the Parliamentary Secretary as to the type of voluntary work this will be.
The Parliamentary Secretary was also kind enough to refer to the work which his Department is carrying out in connection with the coast erosion problem at Rosslare Strand. In case anybody thinks that Rosslare has been selected specially, or because it is in the constituency of the Minister for Finance, there is a problem in Rosslare Strand and, as has been explained today and on other occasions, the work is experimental. None of us expects that every single penny spent on a problem such as coast erosion can be justified because, in dealing with the sea and the vagaries of the tides, one does not know what to expect.
Coast erosion is a problem and a particular problem on the east and south-eastern coasts. I wonder, however, if the money provided for this experiment is sufficient. I do not know and I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary if, when replying, he would kindly tell us what, if anything, they have learned from this experiment which has been going on at Rosslare Strand for about three years. It does not seem to me that the experiment has been wholly successful. It has been successful, I am informed, in parts of the area now subjected to coast erosion in Rosslare but I honestly suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that if he believes this experiment is not likely to be successful he should continue the work certainly but change his method or employ some consultant from Holland, say, who would be in a better position, with all due respect to our engineers, in dealing with this problem of which the Dutch engineers have particular experience. I say that without any disrespect to any of the engineers now employed by the Board of Works on tackling this problem of coast erosion at Rosslare Strand in an effort to provide a solution for coast erosion in different parts of the country.
I again ask the Parliamentary Secretary to induce the Government to make available more money for the building of schools—No. 1, to provide the schools, and No. 2, to keep in the country many building workers who will be forced to emigrate when our housing needs are satisfied in the areas which now require houses. It would be a tragedy if we were to lose these workers. I am hopeful that many factories will be built in the very near future. If the Government are hopeful or satisfied that these factories will be built would it not be a terrible tragedy if we had no workers to build them?
If, for example, when the housing scheme at present in progress in Wexford is completed, the building workers go to employment in Britain it will be very difficult to get them back. Similarly if workers are laid off in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Waterford or any other centre they will not be content to remain here for six months until they can get work again. I think the Parliamentary Secretary could help to keep people at home so that they will be available to build the factories which all of us ardently desire to see built in the country in the immediate future.
Allow me to congratulate the Parliamentary Secretary first, on his appointment and, secondly, on the way he has introduced this Estimate. I think every Deputy in the House will agree that it was a clear and factual presentation with no room for misunderstanding. The building of new schools, at least in my constituency, is a very slow process. I believe that the architects and engineers when planning these schools should confine the buildings, especially where the reverend managers get the sites, to one end of the sites. At present a new school is almost completed in my constituency with the exception of the boundary wall. That site could have provided a splendid football pitch for the children and perhaps a tennis court in addition if the building had been properly sited for the benefit of the children and had the school been placed nearer the main road and to one side of the site.
As the Parliamentary Secretary knows, we have a drainage scheme in our catchment area which is on the verge of completion. I understood that, as it went through and as the rivers and streams leading into the Corrib were cleaned and the machinery moved on, after a certain length of time the machinery would be brought back over some of those rivers to clear away clay and mud that had again collected there. I am afraid that is not being done although I know that some of the streams and rivers are practically choked and a little more work on them would make all the difference.
The delay in regard to work on piers and harbours is appalling, but I cannot say that the Board of Works is at fault all the time. It is between the Board, the Department of Lands and the Department of the Gaeltacht. It seems to be like ducks and drakes, going from one to another without getting a decision made in the shortest possible time. Surveys have been carried out of certain piers and harbours in my constituency without result. Examinations have been made on several occasions, and I am sorry to say that fishermen find it almost impossible to moor their boats, especially in high tides and stormy weather. Some of their fishing boats, on which they depend for a living, have been broken on the rocks for want of shelter. I trust that the present energetic Parliamentary Secretary will do his best to speed up action in the future.
I also congratulate the Parliamentary Secretary on his appointment. When the position became vacant many of us hoped he would succeed Deputy Bartley. It was about time we had a Parliamentary Secretary outside of Galway, although I cannot say we have any reason to find fault with the Galwegians who occupied the position previously. I had intended to deal with arterial drainage but, seeing so many children in the Gallery, it might be no harm to discuss schools, especially when the children are led by a Deputy from Clare, Deputy William Murphy. If he has to entertain all of them here, he can certainly claim a good reduction in income tax.
Having heard from the Parliamentary Secretary that there are 700 new schools required and something like 300 needing reconstruction, I must say that is a proposal that will require immense sums of money. As Deputy Corish said it would be well to have that extra money allocated for the purpose. The new schools that have been erected especially since the end of the war are a credit to the architects of the Board of Works and also to the contractors, both the national and vocational schools. But perhaps their construction is too costly; perhaps they are a little too elaborate. In thirty, forty or fifty years they will be entirely out of date and by having them less elaborate and less costly, we could build more for the money allocated.
When schools are erected in rural, urban or city areas, now that rural electrification is widespread and extended to all areas—or will be in the very near future—it would be well, if it is not the practice, to have schools wired for electricity and provision made for heating the schools by electricity if necessary. After all, in many areas it is not so very easy to get turf supplies. Hand-won turf is a thing of the past except in the case of the farmer who cuts sufficient for his own needs. The heating of schools by electricity should prove a great boon to managers, teachers and pupils alike. I trust the Parliamentary Secretary will give us some information as to what the position is in that regard when he comes to reply.
When school sites are being acquired, sites sufficient to cater for recreational activities for the children attending the schools should be acquired. There should be ample space to provide football and hurling pitches for the boys and hockey fields and tennis courts for the girls. Lack of such facilities at the moment is a great drawback. Sites are not large enough to provide facilities for games. It should be remembered that games are an important feature in the physical development of children.
With regard to arterial drainage, we have benefited to a considerable extent already in Kerry, and we hope to benefit still further in the future. A certificate of completion has been issued for the Feale in North Kerry. The drainage of the Maine is in full operation. I do not like having to refer to complaints, but complaints have been made—I have received several— by labourers and workers generally that, though they are registered in the labour exchange, they have been refused work. It is their contention that they are being victimised. It is said that applicants for work have to be recommended by certain Deputies, otherwise their applications are hopeless. I have not made any representations to the Office of Public Works in this matter, but, perhaps, the Parliamentary Secretary would inquire into the matter.
Deputy T. Lynch is to be congratulated on the fact that there is apparently no need for arterial drainage in Waterford, though he seemed to have a grievance because such a scheme was not necessary. His argument seemed to be that such a scheme would bring in more money and provide employment. Recently, we have had occasion in Kerry to consider the estimates. We found ourselves confronted with a claim for £17,000 for the maintenance of the Feale. That will entail a very big increase in the rates. It does seem unfair that people far removed from the actual drainage, and who will not benefit in any way as a result of the work done, should be asked to pay increased rates for maintenance. Possibly, the matter is covered in the 1945 Act, but £17,000 for maintenance this year seems a rather exorbitant figure. If £17,000 is required this year, the first year after the completion of the scheme, double that sum will be necessary, I imagine, in three, four, or five years.
We anticipate a similar demand when the Maine catchment is done. I do not know what the people will do about their rates, especially those far distant from the schemes who will reap no benefit at all. I think that assessment should be in proportion to the benefit derived. In that way, hardship on those who will derive no benefit at all will be relieved. The people in my own area will derive no benefit at all from the drainage of either the Maine or the Feale.
Somewhere in his files the Parliamentary Secretary has information relating to a deputation received by his predecessor in relation to the exclusion of the Brown Flesk from the scheme as originally prepared for the Maine drainage. A case was made. It was to be considered. We have heard nothing about it since. We understand that, as the Flesk is a tributary near the source, it would be the last tributary to be drained. The scheme will take a couple of years and we hope that, before it is completed, provision will be made for the drainage of the Brown Flesk.
This is a peculiar river, a winding river, and the drawing up of plans provided some difficulty for the engineers. The local people are of opinion that the only way to do it successfully would be by a process of "give-and-take"—some land, in the cutting out of bends, might go to a neighbour on the opposite bank, and some land might be given in compensation for that. The people in the area own the best land in Kerry. It forms part of the Golden Vale. Surely, it is only right their lands should be drained. I appeal to the Parliamentary Secretary to consult his files and take some steps to deal with the position before it is too late.
I had a question down recently with regard to the flooding of the Flesk, which flows into Killarney Lakes. It is in the Laune catchment area. I understand the Parliamentary Secretary is aware of the position there. He has received a deputation from the area in connection with the very serious flooding which occurred last year. The Parliamentary Secretary and his officials are aware that, if the people in Dunflesk have to wait until the arterial drainage scheme comes into operation, not very many of them will be left in the area awaiting rescue. Their lives, their homes, their livestock are in constant danger from flooding which occurs very frequently and very quickly. I do not suppose the Parliamentary Secretary would like to detail the priority list, but I am rather wondering in what position on that list is the River Flesk. In his statement he referred to intermediate rivers. Perhaps the Flesk would come under that heading. If it does, the possibility is that relief may come more quickly than is anticipated if we have to wait for arterial drainage.
There has been a good deal of talk about coastal erosion. A couple of months ago the Kerry County Council asked the Parliamentary Secretary to receive a deputation in connection with very serious erosion in two areas in Kerry, Ballyheigue in North Kerry and Waterville in South Kerry. In reply to a Parliamentary Question which I put down, the Parliamentary Secretary said that surveys were being made and until such surveys were completed, he could not receive a deputation. So long as the surveys are being made, we are quite satisfied, but I hope he will receive a deputation soon and will acquaint the Kerry County Council and the people concerned of surveys that have been carried out.
I am especially interested in Waterville, a very important village in Kerry; but perhaps the people living there prefer to call it a town. If something is not done to prevent coast erosion in that area, Waterville will be submerged in the very near future.
Deputy T. Lynch claimed credit for getting the steamrolling done in the courtyard in front of Leinster House because he made a complaint last year that Deputies had to wade through water to get into the House. Some improvements have been made to the wings of the House and it would be no harm if the front of Leinster House got a new look. I do not know what could be done but I am sure the Board of Works could make improvements so that our Houses of Parliament will be a credit to the country and also present a pleasant appearance to visitors. The school children in the public gallery must be rather amazed to see this building facing them and wonder if it can be our Parliament.
I congratulate the Parliamentary Secretary on his appointment and wish him every success. As far as I know, he is a very courteous and efficient man who will make his mark in our Parliament. He has a very important role to play in regard to the work to be carried out through the length and breadth of Ireland. However, while in his speech he traversed the country from Donegal to Kerry and from Clare to Dublin Bay, he seemed to ignore altogether the existence of the territory we call Cork. While he referred to the hundreds of thousands of pounds we spent all over Ireland, he forgot that there was such a place as Cork and such a place as West Cork and that in the whole county of Cork not one river has so far been cleaned under the Arterial Drainage Act. I appreciate that a survey has been started in two small catchment areas but I sincerely hope there will not be any undue delay on the part of the Board of Works in starting work on those rivers, once the survey has been completed. Time and again, I have stressed the importance of cleaning these rivers in order to bring valuable land into cultivation in that forgotten part of Ireland.
County Cork is one-eighth of our territory, producing over half the agricultural produce of the country. We pay more than our share in revenue to the Government and it is high time the Board of Works and the Parliamentary Secretary turned their eyes southwards for at least a couple of years until this essential work is done.
We had a very important deputation here some time ago in connection with Castletownbere, and I should like to impress upon the Parliamentary Secretary the urgency of erecting a new pier there. The first year I was a Member of this House I put down a Question about the landings of fish, and I was informed that Castletownbere had the second largest in Ireland. The pier is in a very bad condition and has been condemned by the engineers as being dangerous. While I do not know what is in the reports of the Swedish engineer, I am sure he realises the absolute necessity for the erection of a new pier there. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to press the case with all his might and see that the work is put in hands as quickly as possible.
The fishing industry is very important to the people of that area. It is practically their sole means of livelihood and unless those people are helped in this respect, they cannot be expected to stay there and make a living. I sincerely hope I shall not have to refer to the Castletownbere pier again.
The erection of schools is a very important matter and when the Board of Works erect a new school, they should ensure that proper water and sewerage facilities are available. It may not be possible in all areas, but, where possible, water should be installed in every new school.
I must dissociate myself from the decision to extend Leinster House because of cramming. Cramming in our schools is a far more serious problem to parents and children than it is in Leinster House. I see no cramming in Leinster House to interfere with anybody's health, but I see plenty of it in some of the schools in my own constituency, and it is a serious impediment to educating the children attending them. I disapprove of a decision to spend large sums of money on an extension of the accommodation here which is adequate for many years to come. The building of schools, fishery harbours and piers and the cleaning of rivers are far more important than an extension to Leinster House and some of the other projects mooted here for the city of Dublin. I want the money spread more evenly over the country for the benefit of all the people. The all-important thing is to spend wisely the money we have at our disposal, and it is often said that we are not doing that. First things should come first, and such projects as the Garden of Remembrance and the extension to Leinster House should, in my opinion, come last.
I would impress upon the Parliamentary Secretary the importance of first carrying out the work on harbours, piers and schools in the country, and, in particular, the cleaning of rivers. These rivers have been doing much damage, holding up other work and washing from the soil the manures and lime which have cost us so much money. If first things are put first, the Parliamentary Secretary will hear no grouse from me or from any other man who has to pay his way, but when money is squandered in an unnecessary fashion, there is bound to be grumbling and grousing. I do not believe in spending money for the mere sake of giving employment. I always like to get value for money spent. We should, therefore, spend wisely on capital development, which will be of lasting benefit to the country and the people.
As this is the first Estimate the Parliamentary Secretary has brought into the House since he took up duty, I join with other Deputies in congratulating him and wishing him well in his job.
He has informed the House that the school building programme will continue this year the same as last year. As a teacher, I am very pleased to hear that. Last year, I understand from the Parliamentary Secretary's statement, saw the spending of the largest figure ever on the building of new schools, extensions and repairs. However, there are many schools still requiring to be replaced or repaired. Last year, we had the pleasure of having the Parliamentary Secretary open an extension to the school in which I myself teach. That school was built only three years ago; yet we had to build an extra room on to it. That is a most encouraging thing at this time when we hear so many references to the flight from the land. I mention it to impress upon the architects and those taking the figures for school buildings that, where they see an upward trend in the population, they should take that into account.
As principal of the school, I impressed upon the people concerned at the time that it would not be big enough. When it was originally opened, I forecast that before many years a new room would have to be built on to it. However, I did not think the necessity would arise quite so soon. It was originally built for 80, but on the first day, 99 were present. That shows that even at the time it was opened there were more pupils than the number for which it was built. However, we have got the additional room now and I am glad to say the population is still showing an upward trend. In fact, before the Parliamentary Secretary leaves office, we may have to have him down to open another addition to the school.
I want to compliment the architects and the engineers of the Board of Works on the modern design of the recently built schools compared with the drab buildings where I went-to school myself and where, 25 years ago, I started to teach. These modern schools are certainly a credit to the architects. It is grand to see electric light, heating, water and sewerage in all the new schools built in rural Ireland. I hope that will continue.
This Vote also deals with drainage. I was glad to hear the Parliamentary Secretary state that the preliminary investigation of the River Shannon flood problem was almost complete, and that he hoped the engineering report would be available before the end of the year. My constituency does not exactly border the Shannon, but it borders the Suck, which, of course, is a tributary of the Shannon but is a separate catchment area. I hope that the Suck will not be swamped out by all the other rivers that have been mentioned.
That is your vote-catching area.
According to Mr. Rydell, the gentleman who was brought over here to survey the Shannon, the Suck was to be left over until the Shannon flooding had been fully relieved. However, we have experience heretofore of the Brosna catchment area being drained under the arterial drainage scheme without causing any extra flooding in the Shannon, so far as anybody could see. One must remember that when a river is widened and deepened, it will naturally hold more water than it did previously, and I believe we have plenty of engineers and experts of our own who could tackle the drainage of the Suck, in spite of what Mr. Rydell has said. They could treat it as a simple catchment area, independent of the Shannon, and as I have said, we have had experience of the Brosna being tackled, even though it flows into the Shannon, without adding to the problem there.
There are hundreds of acres of land along both sides of the Suck and the people who have holdings there are all small farmers with large families. They depend on every acre of their land, but hundreds of acres of their lands are flooded year after year. If the catchment area were treated now, it would solve their problems by making good land available to them.
The Corrib-Clare catchment area is at the other end of my constituency and I do not intend to go into the merits or demerits of the case raised here at one time when it was originally the Corrib-Clare-Mask catchment area, and part of it was taken out and treated separately. From question and answer in this House, it has transpired that it was originally one area and that part of it was cut out. Anything that is partitioned, as we know in regard to the partition of our country, is unnatural and unjust, and if that is so in regard to our country, it is equally the case in this instance. I hope that the partitioned part will be restored to the original area and that the whole scheme will be carried out as originally planned for the benefit of farmers around Belclare and Caherlistrane whose lands are being flooded every year.
I come now to the position in regard to the Corrib-Clare scheme. A lot of very useful work was done on that and hundreds of acres of land were reclaimed and put into use, but I have a few comments to make with regard to improvements which I think should have been made there. For instance, there are some rivers and drains in the Corrib-Clare catchment area which were originally pegged for the carrying out of drainage work. The machinery to do the work was brought there and, when the people saw the pegs and the survey being carried out, they understood that the work was to be done, but to their amazement an engineer or a ganger came along and the machinery was taken away. Long portions of rivers and major drains were left undone and the pegs are still to be seen there. Neither I nor the people concerned can understand this.
People who have signed with the Department of Agriculture to have their lands drained into these rivers and drains are still waiting for the catchment schemes to be completed, and I would like to see some cooperation with the Department of Agriculture, and also with the local authorities, on this drainage matter. Each will do a certain amount but when a major scheme is involved, I imagine it is the Parliamentary Secretary's Office that should coordinate the whole lot. Drainage work is required by 14 farmers and it is no good doing a scheme to serve three or four of them, leaving the rest of it uncompleted, so that when an engineer comes along from the Department, he says to the others: "We cannot do anything further until the main drain is done." I am saying that for the benefit of some other Deputies also. I do not know if these farmers did something wrong but it has so happened that they were left in the dark. The land was pegged, the pegs are still there; but the work was not done.
To pinpoint this, there is a farmer named Thomas Kelly of Windfield Road, Menlough, Ballinasloe, Co. Galway, who has 14 acres of land flooded and who wishes to have them drained under the Land Project. The officials eventually tried to drain the land for him and pipes were put down, but, instead of the water flowing through the pipes, it flowed over them or under them. There is a river there, the Abbert river, and a junction of the road which is flooded for three or four months of the year. The river is closed up with weeds but after a scheme was started to clear it, it came to a standstill and the machinery was taken away.
I was asked to raise this matter in the House and I consider it my duty to do so. That is an isolated case but I have nine or ten others which I do not want to give in full in this speech because I shall give the details privately to the Parliamentary Secretary, of work left undone under the Corrib drainage scheme which would give immense benefit if the whole scheme were completed. By halting the work, it is just like ruining the ship for a ha'penny worth of tar.
I shall come now to another matter which I have taken up in writing with the Board of Works in an attempt to have it rectified. This is a case where a river was drained and a little bridge was put across it. It affects the lands of Peter Divilly, Polnabrone, Menlough, Ballinasloe, Co. Galway, and other farmers in the area, and I can vouch for this myself because I was taken up to see the bridge. In any case, I had to get my turf there last year and I passed it so many times each day. This scheme was done before the major catchment scheme came along and, because there was not a lot of money left over, a tar barrel was placed under the bridge for the water to flow through.
Then the Board of Works came along with their machinery to drain the river and took up the bridge and the tar barrel through which the water flowed under it. They put down a new bridge, and in the gullet under the bridge they put in a thing made out of concrete casting, instead of the tar barrel. If put at the same level as the former one, it would have been all right. I do not want to blame the ganger or the men who worked on it. I imagine that they were working from levels and carried out the work they were told to do. They put this concrete cast at the level prescribed and, instead of the water flowing out through it, it flowed out under it and at each side of of it. In order to get the water to flow out—you will imagine this is silly—they put stones in front and cement on top, to force the water to flow out through this thing, thereby creating a sluice and keeping the water back, which resulted in flooding of land and the bog behind it. That is an absolute fact. I saw this thing.
The farmers affected are tempted to use pickaxes to rip it out. They asked me to write about it, which I did, but, so far, have got no satisfaction except a letter to state that the Commissioners are satisfied. The Commissioners have not seen this. The people who made a botch of the job probably wrote and told them that it was all right and their word was accepted. I got a letter from the Commissioners stating that they are satisfied that this was a good job.
If I bring the Parliamentary Secretary to the district to open a school or an extension to a school, I should like him to see this for himself. One does not have to be an engineer to see the sluice holding back the water, which is not allowed to flow as it should flow, if it could find its own level.
I mention that case in particular, because I promised the people concerned that I would raise it by question or otherwise in this House. I have tried to raise the matter by other methods but, so far, have failed. Therefore, I bring it up in public now, in the hope that something will come of it.
I want again to compliment the Parliamentary Secretary on his appointment and to wish him very many happy years in the post.
I join with the other Deputies in complimenting the Parliamentary Secretary. I was delighted at his appointment. I believe he will justify my feelings and those of other Deputies.
With regard to the provision of £6,000 odd for the National Monuments Trust, I must refer to a decision of theirs. I do not know if anything can be done about it at this stage. I refer to the Lion's Tower, part of the ancient walls of Galway. There is no greater authority in this country on this matter than Professor Hayes McCoy. His opinion should not be questioned, that the preservation order should be renewed so that the walls will not be allowed to crumble or be demolished. I wonder what would happen in Northern Ireland if the opposite number of the Parliamentary Secretary were to allow the walls of Derry to crumble. There would be uproar.
Feeling is beginning to run high in regard to the question of the last remaining section of the old walls of Galway city. Public bodies have expressed their views. The situation has been reached in which it is intended to demolish the wall. As it is, it is an eyesore. Something will have to be done. It is anything but a presentable structure as it stands, but the last thing we would agree on is demolition.
I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to let me know if there has been a decision with regard to the wages of workers on the Corrib scheme at Galway. I refer to city workers employed at the mouth of the Friars Cut. The increase which has been granted to the country group should be extended to the city men. That increase is overdue. Also with regard to the Corrib, there is the question of damage to houses along the river bank, caused inevitably, by vibration from blasting in the river bed. Much of this damage is only beginning to show itself. Houses are crumbling. It is rather strange that all this has happened along the river bank. The Office of Public Works should not fight shy of their responsibility. If such is the case, as I know it is, they should face up to it and see that any damage they have done will be repaired.
In Galway city, there are a number of millrace embankments that are beginning to crumble. Who would come to the rescue if, tomorrow morning, there was a burst in some of these embankments? I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to send down an engineer. The Corrib Navigation accept no responsibility; the corporation cannot accept responsibility; the county council does not accept responsibility. At one time, there was a millrace committee, which is now defunct. The Office of Public Works should step in because the situation will arise in which they will have to. There will be a burst in some of the embankments in the very near future.
I should also like to raise once more the question of the ventilation of this House, especially this Chamber. The air at times is a bit hot but that is not the air to which I refer. At times Deputies cannot stay in the Chamber. They have to go out for a breath of air. I put it to the Parliamentary Secretary that he should have this matter examined.
There is also the question of coast erosion. I have here a letter from five men from Carrowmore, Oranmore, Galway. That district is not in my constituency but is on the border. The letter appeals to me to do something about lands that are flooded every fortnight. It states that the tide knocked down walls and that it is no use in their paying rent and rates for the land. The writers of the letter informed the Land Commission, who do not intend to do anything about it. The Land Commission said:
With reference to your letter of 3rd March, 1960, and subsequent correspondence, regarding the flooding of your above holding, and the lands of five other persons, I am desired by the Land Commission to state that they are not prepared to take any action in the matter.
You cannot expect farmers to produce if perhaps overnight their lands are flooded and their crops ruined. That is very wrong.
A sum of over £6,000 is being allocated to coast protection. I mention this to the Parliamentary Secretary with a view to having the whole matter looked into and the possibility of its being brought to a fruitful conclusion examined.
I notice a provision here for major fishery harbours, and less important harbours. That is work, the importance of which cannot be over-stressed in view of the fact that along our coasts a number of trawlers are based and, at times, they have to go in for protection to harbours which cannot altogether protect them. Some time ago, I asked for a survey of the pier at Kilronan, Aran. I suppose we shall have to wait until the day when a number of these trawlers which are based along the coast, are smashed to bits, because that is what will happen unless something is done. I am suggesting that an elbow should be put on the end of the pier at Kilronan and I am also referring to the need for certain slipways and other protection in the islands of Inishmaan and Inishere.
I note also that there is a provision with regard to fire precautions at Athenry College. In view of the fact that we hope this college will play its part in our agricultural drive, and in the hope of getting the Faculty of Agriculture there, it is important that that should be gone ahead with. I am glad to note that at last the Garda Síochána station at Leenane is to be improved by the expenditure of a sum of £1,500.
I should like to join with other Deputies in congratulating the Parliamentary Secretary. We hope he will be a Minister some day because he is a most approachable type of man and has proved most acceptable to this side of the House.
I should like to mention a few points in connection with Vote 9, which are dealt with in the list submitted to Deputies by the Parliamentary Secretary. I should like to comment, first of all, on No. 1 in this list : the President's Establishment. I see that a sum of £7,500 was allocated for the improvement of planthouse accommodation there. Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary would elaborate somewhat further on that. Every year, during the past ten years, we have had capital expenditure on that very luxurious establishment. In the course of a number of Parliamentary Questions and Answers, I extracted the amount of money which has been spent during the past ten years on that establishment.
The second point with which I want to deal is in relation to No. 14 on this list. It is a small sum, perhaps, to the Parliamentary Secretary, but it is the principle involved I am concerned with and I should like to have it clarified. It is described as "Improvement of Heating" in the Department of Finance. I want to know what type of heating is being used. Is it oil, is it coal, or is it native fuel? It may perhaps be native fuel and, if it is, that covers the matter, but if not, I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to let us know the reason.
Nos. 40 and 41 refer to alterations in connection with Garda Síochána barracks. Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary will let me know what is the position with regard to the construction of a Garda barracks in Roscommon. There are very few amenities in that county. There is no industry and very little employment there and a Garda barracks would be appreciated in that town. I can vouch for the fact that that project has been on the list for quite a number of years and I am sure if an investigation were made, we would find that some other locality had its claim moved up and probably headed off the Roscommon scheme by some devious means.
The other point with which I want to deal is No. 44 on this list which deals with expenditure on national schools. I want to make the comment that, in spite of the fact that the Government admit that over 700 schools require to be replaced, new schools are needed and there are quite a number to be reconstructed, we find that there is not one extra penny voted this year for the erection of new schools. The shocking condition of some of the schools in the rural areas has been brought to the notice of the Government on a number of occasions. I know of a school where, up to recently, when heavy rain was falling, the children had to leave the school itself and try to take shelter in the porch.
That would be a matter for the Minister for Education.
I do not intend to develop it at all, but might I suggest that the Parliamentary Secretary should consult with the Minister for Education and with other members of the Government, as to the feasibility of setting up a special construction branch in the Department of Education? Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary would like to be relieved of his responsibility in that matter. If he would, perhaps we shall help him.
No. 79 on the list is another matter on which I should like to comment and other Deputies have mentioned it, too. A sum of £32,000 is provided for the hangar gates at Baldonnel Aerodrome. Is it a fact that the hangar gates and their erection in Baldonnel Aerodrome cost £32,000? Is that correct? If it is, then we must remember that the total cost of the pet scheme of the Minister for Defence has not been disclosed to the House. In another Estimate, there was a sum of £144,000 for the purchase of three jet planes. I presume the new gates for the hangar have a connection with the jet planes so that is another £32,000 that should be added to the £144,000 for the jets. Figures were given in this House and outside it to the effect that a helicopter which would be of immense benefit on the coast could be purchased for £34,000. We were told we could not afford that, but we have no trouble in finding £32,000 for gates for the hangar in Baldonnel for the pilots to play about.
In connection with drainage allocation, the Parliamentary Secretary, by now, has the case for the River Suck nearly off by heart. Although I feel that it is like knocking one's head against a stone wall, I must, at the same time, make a further case to him to ensure that a scheme for the drainage of the Suck will be put into operation at the earliest possible date.
Previous holders of this office assured the Suck Drainage Committee that when the Corrib scheme was concluded, the plant and machinery would be moved to the River Suck for the carrying out of drainage in that catchment area. When I mention previous Parliamentary Secretaries, I refer to the late Deputy Beegan and also to Deputy Donnellan and Deputy Bartley. Those three men, on various occasions, were Parliamentary Secretaries. They visited Roscommon. Some of them met the county council officially and others attended a meeting of the River Suck Drainage Board. The members of that board and the members of the county council were left under the impression that the River Suck was very high in the priority list.
I know that every area will press its claims, but I should like to know the basis on which the priority list is established. Is it because of political pressure in various localities that one scheme manages to move ahead on the list over others? It has been admitted by the experts in the Office of Public Works that, on the basis of population and of the numbers trying to eke out an existence in the catchment areas, far more families are involved in the River Suck catchment area, for its size, and so on, than in any other catchment area.
Small farmers there are trying to eke out an existence. Do we give preference to the small farmers and the number of these involved, or to catchment areas where the land may be of much greater value but is owned by fewer people? There are areas in the country where prime land is flooded but where the prime land is owned by a very limited number of people. On the other hand, we have areas where the land may not be of the highest quality but where a large number of families are trying to eke out an existence. Do we give priority to the claim of the families or to the claim of the ranchers? That is important.
The River Suck is one of those rivers that come into the category of having along its banks large numbers of small holdings. Over the years, many of the people on these small holdings have given up hope. Now, they will be able to join the general stream of emigrants from the west, locking up their houses and disappearing.
While I do not object to the idea of intermediate river drainage, I suggest that the danger exists that schemes already on the priority list under the Arterial Drainage Act are likely to be postponed, due to the fact that the endeavours of the survey teams are being directed to these intermediate drainage areas. As far as County Roscommon is concerned, we are precluded from having any work done under an intermediate drainage scheme, if we are to accept what the Parliamentary Secretary has said as being correct that there must be separate catchment areas with a direct outflow. I gather that only rivers which flow directly to the sea can be included in this intermediate drainage scheme. Of course, that will preclude a county such as Roscommon.
I hope I do not sound unreasonable when I say that all groups in Roscommon, including the Minister's Party, have, over the years, pressed as hard as they possibly could to have something done to remedy the position in that county, to ease the burden on the farmers whose lands are constantly flooded. I know that other Deputies must be bored at times when they hear so much talk about flooding but no area in the country suffers as much from flooding as that part because of its geographical position—the Suck running along one border for a considerable length of the county and the Shannon along the other side.
When both of these rivers are flooded, they cover practically half the county. Everybody here must be aware that the newspapers, over the years, have given plenty of publicity to the havoc wrought by the Shannon, in particular. Very recently, we were told there is a danger involved in carrying out drainage work on the River Suck. This is a new piece of information which has only just been made available to us.
There was no question, in years past, as far as the engineers of the Office of Public Works were concerned, about the drainage of the River Suck into the Shannon causing harm to the people living lower down the banks of the Shannon. However, since the inspection of the Shannon area by Mr. Rydell, fears have been expressed that it would be dangerous to carry out work on the Suck for fear of flooding land along the Shannon. That argument did not arise when the Brosna was being done. What is still more important, that argument has not been used as far as the River Inny is concerned. People are beginning to lose patience about this question of drainage. It might be no harm to have the Minister aware of this situation.
As the Parliamentary Secretary knows, the River Inny flows into the Shannon at Athlone. Practically right beside that, there is another river from the Roscommon side flowing into the Shannon. The Office of Public Works are precluded from carrying out drainage works on the Roscommon side. The basis of the refusal is the danger of doing piecemeal drainage under the 1945 Act. Nevertheless, on the far side, the River Inny is to be drained. The work is to commence in the next few months and it is to be drained into the River Shannon. That is to be drained into the Shannon. The volume of water in the Inny is far greater than the volume of water in most of the other tributaries. It is, I think, the second biggest tributary of the Shannon.
There is something extraordinary about that situation. It is something people are not going to accept any longer with the same patience they have shown up to the present. Many of us in Roscommon had on occasion to urge, particularly on the people in the Crannagh-Cross area, to have patience, that the Government, whatever Government might be in power, would surely recognise their just request for aid.
So far, the Government have refused to give any grant for the drainage of this river but they have not so far made any bones about the county council raising the money from the rates. As far as the Government are concerned, we are told that the Board of Works are precluded from doing arterial drainage on the grounds that it is piecemeal and, therefore, it would be dangerous to do it unless the catchment area were being drained. At the same time, the Government say to the county council: "You can go ahead and do it yourselves out of the rates." Is that not another conflicting story? How can the people be expected to have patience much longer?
In regard to subhead J.1, there is a reduction of £2,000 in the provision for the arterial drainage survey. The statement says that this does not mean there is any diminution in the arterial drainage survey programme, but is due to the fact that the outdoor work on the special preliminary investigation in connection with the River Shannon flood proper is almost completed. Perhaps, we could find out what the £2,000 will be spent on. If the rate of progress is to be kept up and maintained in the drainage works, surely there should be no reduction in the expenditure on the survey team. If the Shannon flood problem investigation is completed by the end of the year, why should there be a reduction as a result of that in the Estimate? Should not the team engaged on that work be switched on to some other work?
On the question of the survey itself upon the Shannon, does this mean that the report, which is expected at the end of the year, is of a nature that will either give the Government an opportunity to embark on a proper survey or does the report mean that a survey has been included up to the present and that the work is likely to commence within a reasonable time after this report is received? Could we have any indication as to whether, when this report is received, a drainage scheme of some description to ameliorate conditions, will be undertaken within, say, 12 months or two years of the issue of that report? At least that would be some news to the people concerned.
It is bad enough to have this flooding every year but it is much worse when you find that you have no definite knowledge that in five or seven years' time steps will be taken to remedy it. Even if the people had accurate imformation as to when some practical steps would be taken, I think it would relieve the situation.
I cannot be any milder than I have been on this matter of drainage because I feel we must explore all the peaceful lines open to us in regard to drainage before the people themselves decide to take action outside those lines. As it stands at the moment, the small farmers in Roscommon County are almost at boiling point. I say that now, having given the matter very careful thought. I am talking now about the Minister's supporters as well as the supporters of all political Parties. I am not issuing any threats as to the kind of organisation that will evolve along the Shannon but I can tell the Minister that the situation that has developed up to now will become very serious for the Government unless some light is cast on the Government's plans for work on the Shannon.
I have been in touch within the past few weeks with farming groups on the Shannon and I was disturbed at the reactions generally of all the groups concerned. It is no longer a question of Party politics. It is a question, as far as these people are concerned, of wanting work done or there will be no more rent and rates paid. If that attitude develops, it can turn into a prairie fire and the Government will have nobody to blame but themselves. The Government should let the people along the Shannon know definitely whether, when this report is issued, they can hope to have practical steps taken of some description to remedy the problems which have lasted so many years.
The Parliamentary Secretary should take the opportunity, if he has nothing good to tell us in this debate, of attending a meeting at a suitable venue near the Shannon so that he can explain the position to a representative gathering of the farmers. Not so long ago a deputation attended on the Parliamentary Secretary in connection with the drainage problem. That deputation should have been received by the Taoiseach. The application for the deputation was sent to the Taoiseach.
That seems to be outside the scope of the debate.
Everything is outside the scope of the debate as far as I can see. I raised a question in this House with the Taoiseach as to why he sidetracked it and sent it to the Parliamentary Secretary. At this stage, I shall say no more about it except that the Parliamentary Secretary should now put to the Government how serious the situation is. If the Taoiseach is not prepared to receive the deputation and know the facts for himself, the Parliamentary Secretary has no excuse. He knows the facts and the temper of the people now. I hope he will take the necessary steps to indicate to them when some measures of a practical nature will be taken to ease the position.
I first wish to compliment the Parliamentary Secretary on the very efficient and courteous way in which he is carrying out his work. He has proved a very good Parliamentary Secretary since he was appointed and is carrying out his duties very efficiently. We wish him well and hope he will be long spared to continue the good work. There are a few items in this Estimate in which I am interested. While the major arterial drainage scheme has been accomplishing very good results since it was started, there is nevertheless a problem in county Dublin which is somewhat acute at certain periods of the year in relation to minor rivers, some of which originate in Meath and cause a considerable flooding in various parts of county Dublin. I was delighted to hear that the Government have now put minor rivers under the Department's care.
Have they? I thought it was intermediate rivers.
These minor rivers cause a lot of damage. If we had to wait until all arterial drainage work was completed none of the minor rivers which I have in mind would be cleaned. I welcome the advance made and also the idea of maintaining and cleaning rivers yearly. One thing about schemes under the Local Authorities (Works) Act was that the work was rushed; the job was completed, but no arrangements were made for maintenance afterwards. I want to urge the Parliamentary Secretary to try to get the work done on these minor rivers emptying into the sea. One of the rivers to which I am referring is the Broadmeadow River, which is responsible for flooding hundreds of acres and on which the Department and the engineers have been working for some time. I hope actual drainage work on it will commence in the near future.
Most of the rivers to which I refer run into the sea and work can be started on them from the seashore and proceed inland. There is no excuse for delay. It cannot be said they are flooding other areas, whereas some of the rivers which were cleaned in County Meath were responsible for flooding in county Dublin, where the rivers had not been cleaned the whole way down.
If Dublin County Council did their part there would be no flooding.
I did not intend to say anything sarcastic about the Deputy's county.
Just a friendly exchange of muddy water.
I suppose we have had some good water and some bad water from County Meath. Another problem hitting us in County Dublin is that of coast erosion. We have a considerable amount of coast erosion along the coast: and it was particularly bad last year in the Rush and Donabate districts. While I know it is a major problem, people representing the various areas in which coast erosion takes place are expected by their constituents to see if anything can be done about it.
As I say Donabate is one area I have in mind. As far as I can see, in a few years' time at least 70 to 80 houses at the point known as The Burrows will be washed away. The inroads made last year by the sea caused the high banks to collapse and in a few more winters the houses will be washed away. That is the position in that respect. The same applies to Rush. These two districts are adjacent to each other and due to the sandy nature of the soil, rough tides take away big quantities of the land.
I should like to refer also to harbours. There has been a report on certain harbours around county Dublin and I intend to deal with those harbours again on the Estimate for the Department of Lands. The Board of Works are partly responsible for these harbours inasmuch as their engineers made a report on them to the Department of Lands. A number of fishing boats have been damaged in Skerries due to overcrowding in the small harbour. Howth harbour has been dredged periodically but Howth is a great tourist centre. A large number of visiting yachts come there from other countries and I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary if possible to arrange to have dredging done between now and 1st June, because sometimes dredging starts during the tourist season and it has not been a great success. I know that in a bad winter the Board of Works cannot very well send their dredger there but nevertheless it is work which will benefit the tourist trade and also benefit the Exchequer and the country as a whole.
I am very satisfied with the progress made in county Dublin in regard to the building of schools, both national and secondary schools, by the Department of Education in conjunction with the Department of Public Works. A number of the schools in the county still need to be replaced but, in the years during which I have been in public life, I have found that if the people and the manager make an honest effort the Board of Works are most helpful. I hope I shall see all the old schools in the county replaced. Last year quite a number of new schools were opened in county Dublin and the Parliamentary Secretary, since he took office, and the Board of Works have been most helpful in these matters.
I agree with the Deputy on the opposite side who referred to cleaning up the outside of Leinster House. We should put our own house in order first and set an example. I feel that the outside of Leinster House, which is very dark and dull looking, should be cleaned up. I heard someone say that an extension of accommodation in Leinster House was not necessary. In Dublin city and county we want to provide some work for tradesmen and labourers. We have heard from the Opposition on numerous occasions a good deal of hypocritical talk about what they would do for Dublin and for Leinster House. We have one-fifth of the population of all Ireland, and perhaps more, in Dublin.
In other countries, the Department of Public Works create employment and go out of their way to do it. It would be a bad situation if we could not look after our public buildings and create employment which will keep our people at home rather than have to listen to the hypocrisy about unemployment expressed from time to time during elections down the country. I believe that work should be carried on and that where possible public buildings should be improved, thereby providing employment——
The question of employment schemes arises on the next Vote.
These Votes deal with various Departments and affect much of the country and, thus, we find various constituencies mentioned. In a general way, listening to the debate since it opened, a plea was made for increased work under various headings. That is very desirable, but, to my mind, the real delay in carrying out works is not attributable entirely to the Board of Works. I think it is due to inadequate staffing. There is a backlog of work which is continuing to pile up, and I think that is because the technical, and architectural staff in particular, are not available. Too much is required of that staff both in regard to new work and work urgently arising in the course of the year.
The Oireachtas buildings have benefited from the attention of the Board of Works. Further plans which are in train in that regard to provide more accommodation will, I am sure, be welcomed and appreciated by the public who come to Leinster House. It is high time that the structure at the gate, in which officials of the House have to remain and where the public wait at times, was replaced. It is unworthy of a national Parliament. So far as I am concerned—and I am sure a great many other Deputies—we shall not find anything to criticise in that proposal.
In regard to the Department of Finance, there is one item to which I should like to refer in connection with receipts under Appropriations-in-Aid. It may be a small matter but it is something that struck me in regard to Dún Laoghaire Pier. On a few occasions I had to go to Westland Row to see off people on the mail boat. I was refused a ticket and told that unless one is travelling, one cannot get a ticket to Dún Laoghaire at such times. That is very hard to understand. I presume it is a question of possible overcrowding but people do not readily understand why they should be refused a ticket to travel on the train to Dun Laoghaire with relatives going away.
I see that provision is being made for a bovine T.B. eradication scheme office in Waterford. That has been commented on already and certainly in Limerick, which is a dairying county and where we are struggling with the bovine T.B. scheme, we need an office instead of having to deal with an office in Tipperary at present which is quite a distance from many areas in Limerick.
The progress in regard to schools, as indicated by the Parliamentary Secretary's statement, shows the number of new buildings and buildings to be enlarged or reconstructed but at the present rate of progress, even though it be a goodly one, it means that it will take from six to eight years to overtake the backlog, even if no further buildings required replacement in the meantime. The buildings which are being erected are pleasant to look at and to work in and the architectural staff are to be complimented, but the point mentioned by Deputy Kitt in regard to ensuring that the accommodation provided will be adequate for the future needs of the area is something that should be closely considered when the building is about to be undertaken.
That is a matter for the Minister for Education rather than for the Parliamentary Secretary.
I notice that in regard to preparatory colleges minor expenditure is provided for by comparison with the large sums previously spent. Naturally, work that has been undertaken must be brought to completion but I understand that the whole question of preparatory colleges is rather in the melting pot at the moment.
I do not notice any provision for Garda barracks in county Limerick. In one area in the county the Garda barracks was destroyed by fire during last year and at present there is no station there. Whether it is proposed to build one and provide some type of station in the area is something we would like to hear from the Parliamentary Secretary.
Drainage has been mentioned by practically every Deputy and it is a matter that arises in my constituency also. We are equally concerned about arterial and minor drainage schemes. Previously there was reference to the Deale and to the inspection and examination of that river that have taken place. I should like to hear from the Parliamentary Secretary when we may expect work on that scheme to commence. For the past three years, we had widespread flooding which caused considerable damage in the area. There is also the river Maigue and its tributary, the Camogue.
