Committee on Finance. - Vote 29—Local Government (Resumed). – Dáil Éireann (16th Dáil) – Tuesday, 4 Jul 1961

Committee on Finance. - Vote 29—Local Government (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:—

"That the Estimate be referred back for re-consideration."—(Deputy Dillon.)

Mr. Crotty

Before we reported progress I said that we need a general election to put life into housing. When the present Government were elected the then Taoiseach said that the completion of the housing of the people was the first duty of the Government. Within 12 months of his making that statement, Deputy Childers, who was Minister for Industry and Commerce at the time, attended a Chamber of Commerce dinner in Kilkenny and said, inter alia, that too much money had been devoted to housing, that he regarded it as slush-money, that he felt that if that money had been invested in industry in general it would give more dividends and more return to the country, that in housing people we were wasting the resources of the State. I would rather support the Leader than Deputy Childers at that time. Apparently Deputy Childers was voicing the opinion of the Government, that they were going to close down on housing. Figures have been quoted this evening which show that, in 1956, 7,000 people were employed on local authority housing alone and in the last year there were 2,200 so employed. As I have mentioned, there was no sanction for any houses in Kilkenny or practically any other urban district.

The only thing that saved local authorities during the past four years from a housing crisis in their various areas was emigration, not only of single people but of families who vacated houses and made them available to people who were very badly in need of them.

The Minister referred to a circular he issued to advise housing authorities that where the needs of the priority categories had been or are in course of being met, proposals could be submitted for persons eligible for and in need of houses qualifying for one-third subsidy where such persons are not able to rehouse themselves with the aid of grants and loans, etc. Take the ordinary working man. What hope has he of rehousing himself? Take the man who has been married for the past eight or nine years and is rearing a family and living with his father and mother or with his wife's father and mother in a corporation house. Under the regulations as laid down by the present Minister he has no hope of getting a corporation house. It is a disgrace that a man who is rearing a family, just because he is living in a corporation house and was married before 1952, has no hope of being rehoused.

By a change in that regulation the Minister could allow all those people who have been married over the past number of years and who are living with their parents, to be rehoused. They have been debarred for a number of years from getting houses. These people deserve houses. If we want to encourage these people to stay in the country or if we are to have any hope of maintaining our population, why not rehouse them? They are fully entitled to a two-thirds subsidy house. The rent of a one-third subsidy house is out of the question for these people.

The rent collection in our local authority was 100 per cent, during the past year. If we go according to the Minister and house those people at one-third subsidy, deficiencies will occur every day because these people will not be able to meet the demands made on them.

Mr. Corish

We are gradually getting down to the Minister for Local Government.

Mr. Crotty

I am carrying on until he arrives. That is an aside. During the past year a change was made in respect of grants for roads. For the improvement of main roads we paid 100 per cent, grant and for the improvement of county roads 40 per cent. grant. On main roads there is a 40 per cent. maintenance grant; on county roads there is no maintenance grant. That is what is pushing up the rates in the county. In practically every county, roads have been tarred during the past years and are now coming to the stage when they have to be resurfaced every four or five years. They must be maintained in proper condition. That is a great burden on councils and they are getting no help whatever. A person living on a county road pays rates and motor tax. Is he not entitled to get the same facilities as a person living on a main road? A number of county roads have been improved and people living on other roads want them brought up to a reasonable standard. To Kilkenny County Council the cost of maintenance of county roads amounts to close on £100,000 a year.

The Minister mentioned that the Road Fund had increased by £2,000,000 this year. Considering the increase in taxes and the way lorry-owners have been bled this year by the Government in increased motor duties, it is no wonder that the Road Fund increased by £2,000,000. Even if there had been no increase in the number of vehicles on the roads, the Road Fund would have increased by £2,000,000. There are still people living on county roads who are not getting the facilities to which they are entitled from the Government. The rates have been pushed up simply and solely because no grant is given for the maintenance of county roads. I appeal to the Minister to give a grant for the maintenance of those roads because, as I say, every year they are being developed and there is still no grant for their maintenance. The county roads should at least be given the same grant as the main roads, that is, 100 per cent. improvement grant and 40 per cent. maintenance grant.

The Minister dealt with the Government's proposal with regard to regional water supply schemes. I welcome regional water supply schemes so far as they are required. The Castlecomer area is very densely populated. It is essential that the people in that area should have running water in their houses and it would be reasonably economical to provide. The Minister assessed the cost of the regional water supply schemes at 5/- in the £.

The Minister for Finance was Minister for Health when the Health Bill was introduced and he estimated that it would cost 2/- in the £. It is now working out at 9/- or 9/6 in the £. I trust the Minister for Local Government will be found to be more realistic in his estimate of 5/- in the £, and that in a short time, it will not be £1 in the £, taking it on the basis of the estimate of the Minister for Finance what it actually worked out at. We know that water is essential in any house that can be serviced at reasonable cost. There are other schemes such as joint schemes under which people get E.S.B. pumped water. That scheme should be used wherever possible and especially in thinly populated areas. Certain facilities, and if necessary, increased grants, should be given to people who have the enterprise and the courage to install water under those schemes.

With regard to town planning, I have been to the Department several times trying to get a decision on certain points and I found it nearly impossible. If a man thinks of changing his business or erecting a petrol pump, it takes six or 12 months to get a decision as to whether or not he will be granted permission to erect a petrol pump in a certain position in front of his premises. There is no point in that long delay of six or 12 months. People say that Governments always take a long time to decide anything, but there should be some way by which a decision could be made within at least three months.

Like Deputy Healy, I welcome the grant for swimming pools. People in the country took it—and I heard it said at meetings—that the grant would be 60 per cent., but tonight the Minister has piped down and said the grant will be 50 per cent., and in exceptional cases, 60 per cent. I hope the Minister will facilitate these people who are thinking of the good of their fellow citizens in providing facilities such as swimming pools. I hope the Minister will not go back on his original statement that the grant will be 60 per cent.

Mr. O'Sullivan

A number of Deputies this afternoon referred to the fact that there has been a serious falling off in the building of local authority houses in recent years. The Minister appears to draw some solace from the fact that there is some slight improvement to report in comparison with last year, but the House must recall that the figures for last year and the year before were extremely low.

It has been said in other places—and it does not bear close examination— that our housing needs have been pretty well satisfied, outside the major centres of population. As Deputy Crotty has just remarked, there is no doubt that the problem has been eased not by the erection of houses but by the emigration of families. We all know that in Ballyfermot at one period as many as 400 houses were vacant. They were abandoned by their occupants who had left the country. In that situation, there is no doubt the demand for houses was considerably eased.

In the rural towns as well as the cities, and in the rural areas, many people are clamouring to their public representatives for advice and assistance to procure a home. We know of many young couples desiring to establish a home who are awaiting the possibility of securing a home before entering into the married state. Apart from that, we know of the very serious conditions in which many young children are being reared in some condemned houses. While that situation exists, we cannot ease up on the housing drive. Last year, the Minister circulated a letter to local authorities indicating his desire that they should forge ahead with their proposals, but it has been our experience since then that there has been no dramatic improvement in the facility with which sanction has been procured for the erection of houses.

I note that the Minister refers to advances under the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Acts. I was a member of a small committee appointed from Cork County Council to examine this matter. We recommended to the Minister that the ceiling should be raised. I am glad the Minister has done so in relation to incomes, which are now increased from £832 per annum to £1,040, but it is astonishing that the Minister completely ignored the recommendations in relation to increasing the ceiling limitation on farm valuations. In that respect, he has left the level unchanged. The increase in cash incomes was reasonable, but I should like the Minister in reply to explain why he did not raise the ceiling in regard to the limitation on the poor law valuation of farmers seeking assistance under the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Acts. That was the point I wished particularly to raise with regard to S.D.A. loans.

The emphasis we have given down the years by way of 100 per cent. recoupment to local authorities in respect of main roads has served a good purpose, but we cannot forget the people who have to live, work and travel on the terrible bye-roads that still exist in the country. We know progress has been made but it has not been made as rapidly as we would wish. These people are being asked by all parties to increase their production. They are told about the importance of their industry, but it is frustrating for them to find that the conditions of the roads are such that they have to suffer additional expenditure beyond their neighbours in the towns and villages and on the side of the main roads in respect of the vehicles they use to bring their produce to the market, to bring their milk to the creameries or to bring their families to Mass, to town or to school.

There is also the movement for the improvement of roads, which have not yet been classified as local authority roads, under the assistance given by the Special Employment Schemes Office. Throughout the country many hundreds of people are co-operating to get the roads servicing their homesteads improved through that means. We know where money was expended in the past on these roads that deterioration occurs with usage on them and that, after the elapse of a few years, their condition is no much better than before the money was expended on improving them. It is vital that there would be proper liaison between the local authorities, the Department of Local Government, the Special Employment Schemes Office and the people who succeed in bringing such roads up to standard. There is continual pressure on local authorities to take responsibility for such roads, but due to the charge which would be incurred in bringing these roads up to standard, only an infinitesimal number of them have been accepted by local authorities for maintenance.

Where roads have been brought up to standard, the Special Employment Schemes Office should notify the Department of Local Government. We have an arrangement in Cork now whereby that is done. We believe we can reasonably maintain such roads at no great additional cost inasmuch as they have been brought up to the required standard by the combined grants from the Special Employment Schemes Office and the local contribution of the people living on the roads. If the possibility of the local authority being subsequently responsible for the maintenance of the roads were held out to them, more people would contribute to the improvement of such roads. At the moment it appears to be rather optional, but the lead should be given by the Minister, in collaboration with the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance, to see to it that these roads were maintained once they were brought up to standard thus ensuring that the Department would not be called upon to rehabilitate roads which had deteriorated because of usage.

I do not see any provision in this Estimate for the considerable sum of compensation which Cork County Council will seek from the Minister if the process of elimination of the railways in the county is proceeded with. Possibly, the reason there is no provision this year is that the Government were of opinion that the legal action which has yet to be heard in relation to the closure of the West Cork line will fail, that they believe they are on a sticky wicket and that as a result of these proceedings there may be no demand for the huge amount of compensation sought to compensate the county of Cork for additional traffic the roads will have to bear in consequence of the transfer of such a formidable amount of traffic from railway to road.

We are strengthened in our claim by adverting to the comparable amount of compensation which has been made available, particularly in Donegal where compensation was made to the local authority to permit it to bring the roads up to the standard where they would be capable of carrying the volume of vehicle and additional traffic they had to carry in consequence of the closure of the railway line. Those of us who travel the roads between Bantry and the city of Cork since the transfer of traffic from railway to road are only too conversant with the necessity for the elimination of bridges, bad turns, the improvement of the foundations of many of these roads to carry these huge vehicles, the difficulty of traversing these roads and the huge transport vehicles which make travel extremely difficult.

As outlined by the Cork County Engineer, it will be necessary to expend a very considerable amount of money on the improvement of these roads so they can carry this traffic if and when the case is resolved in relation to the challenge by the people of West Cork in an effort to prevent C.I.E. from proceeding with this policy of transferring so much traffic on to the roads. I regret if the Government feel they will come out winners in this effort and, therefore, did not include any sum. On the other hand, if it is the belief of the Government that it may not be necessary——

Mr. Moran

I submit, Sir, that references to pending litigation should not be made by the Deputy. This matter is sub judice.

An Ceann Comhairle

If the Deputy is referring to legislation or to a legal action pending, he is surely prejudicing the position and he should not make use of the House to do so.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

He is not referring to a legal action. He is referring only to the question of the roads required.

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not see how you can separate one from the other.

Mr. Moran

The Deputy has been speculating on what the result of this legal action might be.

An Ceann Comhairle

If the legal action has been initiated, the Deputy should drop the matter.

Mr. O'Sullivan

Very good, Sir. In view of the fact that the line has been closed, I would be in order in discussing whether it should have been closed or not? We have had the experience of the traffic on the road. I could refer to that without referring to the legal action.

An Ceann Comhairle

It is the substance of the legal action to which the Deputy may not refer.

Mr. O'Sullivan

Very good, Sir. The consequence of the closure has been that much traffic that formerly traversed these main roads has been diverted to alternative roads; and even those roads which had not much traffic on them up to recent months have now to carry many vehicles forced off the main roads because of the difficulty of getting to their destination and because of the increased dangers on the main roads. It is from that point of view we feel in County Cork that there should be special consideration for the problem existing there.

There is one other point to which I wish to refer, and I do not make any apology for being repetitive in referring to it. Even within recent weeks land owners have approached me on a deputation regarding the flooding of their land consequent on the silting and development of overgrowth on small rivers. The local authority is also seriously affected because roadways are flooded by this river. There is one objector to this drainage under the land project. To my knowledge there was only one scheme and there is only one scheme in existence which gives power to go in and clean such a river or such a stream irrespective of objections from local land owners, and that was the Local Authorities (Works) Acts.

That scheme, we understand, is in a state of suspension. There is no money voted in this Estimate for resuming operations under that scheme and I do make the earnest appeal to the Minister, now that some time has elapsed since the scheme was suspended, that there must be a good case for resuming the works under it when Deputies, members of local authorities of all Parties, including the Government Party Deputies, are so vehement at local authority level in relation to resuming the works under the Local Authorities (Works) Acts.

Far from there being a saving to the Exchequer, as we were told at the time, we had to find unemployment assistance for many of the workers who were engaged in such work. However, I am not referring to it as the useful source of employment which that scheme presented but as a necessity in relation to the abatement of the flooding problems that exist in regard to very many rivers and streams consequent on the complete elimination of the operations under that scheme.

The local authorities have to find an increased amount of money to meet many commitments today. We know that general taxation has increased but I doubt if there is any impact bearing as heavily on our people as the burden of rates which at the moment are being collected by local authorities. It is quite some time since the Party which is now in Government advanced the view from these benches that local taxation had reached the point beyond which the people could not meet the bill. Some years have passed since then but with each year we have growing demands on the ratepayers to meet the increasing bills presented at local authority level.

Very many ratepayers believe that the local authorities are being called upon to pay many expenses that should be borne by the Exchequer. There was quite some interest in a recent announcement that somebody or other was going to undertake an examination of local taxation. That is very desirable. Many people are looking to this body for relief when it reports, relief from the burden they have to carry today by way of rate demands. Those of us who are on local authorities, some of us for the first time, know of the very many worth-while schemes that could be implemented if we had the money to pay the piper. We are restricted in the operation of these necessary schemes because we realise we cannot overburden the ratepayers. We find it frustrating that charges are loaded upon the ratepayer in connection with very heavy expenses under health legislation, which preclude councils from embarking upon many other schemes because they feel they cannot add to the load the ratepayer has to meet.

There has been close examination by many councils of the question as to how the collecting authorities could ease the burden on the people who have to pay this sum which has been increasing with such rapidity. One of the big questions which have been concerning local authorities in recent times has been the Minister's examination of the problems that have to be met in the improvement of the supply of water to those people resident in rural parts. With the near completion of rural electrification, there is no doubt that the provision of adequate water supplies is the major need of the people in the rural areas. The Minister's proposals disrupt the work of local authorities to some extent, because of the formidable surveys having to be made to make an appropriate assessment of the needs of the country.

The Minister refers to the scheme costing £2.06 million in my own constituency of North Cork which extends over into the former adjacent constituency of East Cork, entailing a gross expenditure of about 3/- in the £. Very much of this area is a type of limestone land where it would be impossible for the residents to secure water from the sinking of wells adjacent to their homes and they have been precluded from availing of the water supply scheme operated by the Department of Agriculture. I readily admit there is no solution to the problem of making adequate water supplies available in such areas other than giving people access to regional piped supplies. However, in a country with the rainfall we have and where we have had such success in the provision of individual supplies to so many farms throughout the country, we should proceed with that scheme without overlapping it with the suggested piped supply.

I am in favour of a piped supply where it is practicable and where the other supply is not to be secured, but many people, by their own industry, have availed of the grants for the provision of water supplies to their own homes, have paid 50 per cent. of the cost from their own pockets, have secured the State grant in respect of the other 50 per cent. and are pleased with the result. I do not know of any other Department's assistance which is forthcoming for any aspect of development which is regarded as being so successful as the water supply scheme.

It would be grossly unfair to require those people to pay this service of the loan to provide piped water supplies, to pay a third time. It was desirable to continue the existing scheme and provide the piped water supplies where sunken wells could not operate. The group scheme is working well where it has been organised but we should be circumspect in embarking on an extremely expensive, diversified scheme such as was originally presented but which, may I say without being facetious, was watered down quite considerably by the Minister since his first launching of this proposal. I consider that the servicing of such piped water supplies would be extremely difficult and expensive.

The water rate necessary to meet the cost of maintenance and provision of supply could entail a considerable burden on those availing of the scheme. Whatever is proposed in relation to the provision of this scheme in areas where the normal pump sinking is not adequate, I think nothing should be done to divert people from the efforts they may embark upon in relation to the provision of individual supplies for themselves in their own farms. With the increase in usage of heavy machinery and the cost of making connections to the remote farmsteads, far remote from the areas that one would expect these piped supplies to traverse, there is no doubt that the number that could possibly avail of the facilities from piped supplies would not be near so great as that envisaged in the Minister's proposals. We should content ourselves with the utmost encouragement for the continuation of existing schemes in relation to individual grants for the provision of water, particularly to farmers.

I wish to refer to the encouragement given for the provision of swimming pools. I agree with Deputies Healy, Crotty and others who say that this represents to us in Ireland one of the very great backlogs in development that we have. Anything that could assist local groups and local authorities in the development of proper swimming pools, particularly inland, should be availed of.

I also wish to refer to something discussed quite recently at local authority level in my own county. That was that with the increase in the number of vehicles now on the roads, there are serious crowding and parking difficulties at very many seaside resorts. Some attention should be given to the provision of adequate parking at our seaside resorts because, during the fine weekends we have fortunately experienced recently, the confusion was incredible at the many places where in former years one could easily procure a quiet location. It is something which I feel would be very helpful if that problem could be abated by the provision of adequate parking at such places.

Without wishing to repeat myself, my final duty is to make yet another appeal to the Minister to resume the operations of the Local Authority (Works) Act. I think I am not being unfair in saying that I am speaking for very many of the Deputies who support the Government as well as Deputies of my own Party in asking the Minister to review his decision not to resume operations under that scheme. The work is there to be done. The men are there to do it. It is a scheme that will assist many people to overcome the legal difficulties in many instances and the physical difficulties in others. It is something that would be well worth a trial.

Mr. Coogan

I shall be very brief. I want to refer to only one matter. I should like to refer briefly to the political activity of certain home assistance officers in my area.

I am not a bit afraid. I will get an opportunity in the very near future to specify names.

Mr. Desmond

I suppose it is natural, when dealing with local Government, that our first remarks should be confined to the problem of housing. It seems that we and the people as a whole are expected to be convinced by the Minister for Local Government that the housing problem is really solved. I believe it is about time that we face the problem regarding housing and admit that it is anything near being solved.

It is an extraordinary situation if we look back over the years. In 1948 the local authorities were encouraged to build houses. So we did in every county of the Twenty-Six, thanks be to God, but the hands of the local authorities, their officials and members were then free to allow them to face the problem of providing decent homes for the people in their areas. As the years moved on, we arrived at the extraordinary situation where the Department and the Minister for Local Government are a real hindrance to the progressive views and desires of the staff and the members of many local authorities.

It is extraordinary. The unfortunate man, without a decent home, applies to become a tenant of a local authority cottage. First he must pass the local test. The county housing superintendent will report on his housing conditions. The county medical officer of health will do likewise. The engineers will be brought into it. Then he must go through a further test. Will he be passed by the Department of Local Government under the presidency, as it were, of the Minister?

Surely, if any Minister for Local Government insists that the reports of the responsible officials in a local government area are in themselves not sufficient, that must cast a reflection on local authority members and on the staffs? A few months ago, we heard the Minister object to members speaking of officials in local authorities. Now it is my turn to draw attention to the fact that officials are being castigated, because of the efforts by local authorities to rehouse people, by none other than the Minister.

It is about time the Minister realised that local authorities have, on the whole, been prepared to meet their responsibilities in a fair way. It is about time they were given a little freer hand in trying to rehouse these unfortunate people rather than be stymied by the Minister. Yes, I know what I am speaking about.

I know of many instances where honourable men, members of the staff of the Department of Local Government, because they were instructed to do so, had to go down the country and examine and re-examine the applications of people who by now should be housed by the local authorities but, because of the policy of the Local Government Minister, are held up. It is about time that stopped. People may wish for a change of Government. Parties may differ. Different Parties may believe their policy should be the one in operation.

The one policy connected with the Fianna Fáil Government I strongly condemn is the policy on local government which is the greatest hindrance I know in South Cork to the building of the many homes we wish had been built long before now. I will go further I am sorry the Minister for Local Government is not here now but perhaps my remarks may be conveyed to him.

Schemes submitted by the Cork County Council, Southern Committee, for the building of a cheaper type of cottage were held in the Department for 18 long months. All the queries that came to the surface were amazing. As soon as some objections were dealt with by the responsible county architect, who got his position because of his high qualifications, some further miserable, petty objections were raised.

It was over 18 months before they could give sanction. Then, when a few of these houses were built, when it was shown they were built at lower cost than the conventional type, when it was proved they were a superior type of house, we had many officials from the Department of Local Government and many officials from all parts of the country coming to see these houses. What an awful pity that sanction was not given earlier for the building of this new type of house?

It is about time some of the petty objections were ended. God be with the time when a man believed that, as Minister for Local Government, he was the boss there. God be with the time when a Minister for Local Government, the late T.J. Murphy, God rest his soul, not alone was Minister for Local Government in name but was also so by his actions.

At present, again, there are requests from the South Cork County Council area for sanction for the acquisition of sites for building—compulsory purchase orders. What has happened? Why are they in the Custom House for so long? Is anything being done about them? Does the Minister realise that the applications sent up in these instances deal with the problem of people without decent homes? What pleasure is there in holding these applications for such a long period and doing nothing about them? It is about time something were done about them.

It is about time the Minister for Local Government understood that these applications are not made in a frivolous manner. A little speed is needed in his Department to deal with the problem of housing. I am sure what applies in South Cork must equally apply in many other parts of the country.

Then we have the problem of reconstruction grants. Over the years, different Governments have seen fit, in so far as they could do so financially, to encourage people to carry out reconstruction work. A fair amount of work has been done by the grants availed of through the Department and through the local authority. An extraordinary situation now seems to emerge again. It did arise some years back. There was a little easement in it but now we are at the stage of applications being in the Department for months without being cleared.

Far be it from me to blame any official in the Department in the Custom House who is dealing with reconstruction. I should say here and now, wishing to have it on the record, that my experience of these officials is that they are most helpful and most anxious to be of assistance in every way possible. However, the bottleneck in connection with reconstruction is again a problem for the Minister for Local Government. Why not have enough inspectors?

The application, when received in the Department, is sent down to the local inspector and then, as I know to my grief in many cases I have been dealing with, it is many months before it is cleared by him. It may not be his fault and I know of cases where it was not the inspector's fault. It was simply a case of the Minister demanding of an inspector in some areas far more returns than any one man could give in a fair time.

Nobody should know better than the Minister that if he is desirous of speeding up these reconstruction grants, he will have to put on the field sufficient inspectors to deal with the original applications and with the final clearance of the application for grant. That is essential. Very many applications are made at a time when the applicants hope to get the work done during the spring and summer months. Unfortunately, from their experience, by applying in the spring they have as little hope of doing any reconstruction in the summer period as they would if they applied at the start of June and July. It is unreasonable to expect these people to wait so long.

Naturally enough, costs are bound to increase when it comes to the period of the year, from October, for building work. There is another angle to the reconstruction problem. I have in mind the case of an unfortunate woman who carried out work which, as far as she knew, was to the satisfaction of the inspector. There was one problem which the inspector could not straighten out without the woman carrying out extra work. That work was done and he informed the Department that the work was done. She then expected that she would get the grant from the Department to which she was entitled but, strangely enough, another report came in pointing out that there was further work to be done before she could get the grant. That happened a third time.

From my inquiries I discovered that in that area the Minister for Local Government, over a short period of time, had three different inspectors. The result was that the approach of one man varied from that of the man before him. The approach of the third man varied from the approaches of the first two. The third man pointed out that there were a few window fasteners missing and also a sash cord in a window. Surely we must have some regularity in inspections. The tragedy in this case is that the woman, in order to meet her commitments to the builder, had to borrow the money from the bank. Then we are told of the benefits of the grants from the Department of Local Government.

It is vitally important that the problem of inspections should be completely overhauled, that sufficient inspectors be provided, and also that inspections should be based on some recognised standard. We should not have each man varying his inspections according to what he may wish. Adequate allowances should also be made in the case of the valuation of the costing of the work of reconstruction. I know that there are no cases in which the estimate of the Department will compare favourably with the estimate supplied by contractors to a would-be applicant for a reconstruction grant. Of course the Department of Local Government is gaining by this. The person may have to spend £500 on reconstruction and cannot have the amount reduced by one penny under that amount, but the inspector, on behalf of the Minister, in his valuation of that work may assess it as roughly £360 or £370. Of course the Local Government reconstruction grant is based then on the lower valuation of the work being done by the applicant.

Again, there is another joke in connection with reconstruction. When he is submitting the original application, the applicant must also get a form signed by the local authority to verify that the house is fit for reconstruction. What a waste of time! Where would you find a man or woman in the Twenty-Six Counties who would be lunatic enough to spend money—because they have to provide their own share—for the reconstruction of a house if it is not suitable for reconstruction? It is a waste of time and money to require local authorities to have their engineers inspect such houses and verify them as being fit for reconstruction. There is, of course, this other fly in the ointment. It is the case of a person applying for a new home, who is living in bad housing conditions, and who is told through the Minister for Local Government that the house is fit for repair. That of course would mean there would be no new home for that person. In many instances the landlord will not repair such a house.

I have in mind some cases of men living in houses belonging to farmers, but not working for the farmers in question. In one case, when a man applied for a cottage, the house was not condemned because the engineer's report was that the house could be repaired. Certainly the house would be fit for repair at a cost of £300, or perhaps more, but nobody could compel the owner to repair that house. I know the Minister can say that the local authority can do it and that the law provides that the local authority can arrange to get the rent from that tenant until the cost is cleared. That may appear well on paper but it does not work out in practice.

All that the farmer has to do, after the house has been repaired, is to tell the tenant that he wants the house for a workman working for him. Then the unfortunate man is out on the road. I believe where local government is concerned the first important item to be dealt with is housing. As I said, it is far from being clear in South Cork and I am sure in many other areas. There is no use in the Minister for Local Government issuing statements saying that the housing problem has nearly been dealt with while we are still in the midst of this problem and while we still have the acute problem of young people who want to get married and for whom there are no homes. Instead of spending money in other ways we should realise that far more money could be utilised to the benefit of our people in rural Ireland as well as urban Ireland if the Minister would endeavour to solve these problems as regards the housing of these people.

There is another problem and I do not know how far the Minister can go to solve it. It is of the utmost importance to many cottage tenants. This is the problem of tenants of vested cottages. Originally when these people became vested tenants it cost the local authority the very large sum of approximately 10/- to have the cottage registered in the tenant's name. With the death of the tenant, be he farm worker or road worker, while there is no difficulty as regards the transfer of the cottage to the next of kin, whether it be his widow, son or daughter, there is great difficulty as regards the legal fees.

I have come across cases where the cost was anything up to £15. Such a sum is far beyond the means of a son, daughter or widow of a farm worker or a road worker. I am convinced, if it only cost 10/- in the first instance to have the cottage registered in the name of the original tenant, that these legal fees could be avoided if the Minister for Local Government would examine the situation. It is one problem that is affecting a large number of people. It is one problem that will ultimately create many more difficulties because these people will not be able to have the cottages legally vested in them on transfer and, in years to come, there will probably be more trouble and more difficulty in relation to the legal ownership of council cottages and houses than there will be in any other sphere of activity of the Department of Local Government.

Many members of the Minister's own Party have expressed their view on this matter at meetings of the Southern Committee of the county councils. I would ask the Minister to investigate the position to see if there is any way in which clearance could be given by the Minister to local authorities to deal with the second transfer in the same way as they deal with the first registration. I am not, of course, advocating any financial benefit for people who might wish to transfer solely for the purpose of selling the cottages and making a big profit. All I ask is that in a genuine transfer from the original tenant to a member of his family something will be done to relieve him of these financial burdens.

There is an extraordinary situation arising month after month in relation to the vesting of cottages. So far as repairs are concerned there is a conflict between the local authority engineers and members and secondly, between the Minister and his Department, the engineers and the members, in the matter of sufficient or insufficient repairs. I have seen cottages repaired, prepared for vesting, the tenants appealing to the Minister, an inspector coming down, reports being made, and then the cottage is vested without being put into proper repair.

I have condemned that practice, I believe rightly so, at meetings of the local authority and I have condemned local officials for their irresponsibility. I now bring the matter home to the Minister. The inspectors from his Department seem to close their eyes to the necessity for adequate repairs being carried out before these cottages are vested. In many cases, the tenant is an unfortunate old man or old woman who knows little or nothing about the necessary repairs, until he or she is informed the cottage is vested and he or she will henceforth be responsible for all repairs. Six months later, they find to their dismay that the cottages are in such a condition that they are faced with a bill they can never hope to meet. I have seen cottages where slates were loose, where the local engineers refused to repair, where the Minister's inspector passed them as all right. A few months after, the loose slates had fallen off, and more slates with them.

Many members of the Minister's Party, particularly the chairman of the Southern Committee—he is now interested in another part of the county—can give the Minister the facts about an old lady who has been before the Southern Committee in the past few months begging for some assistance for repairs to be carried out to her cottage near the village of Carrignavar. The Minister has not yet given clearance because, in this instance, as in many other instances, an inspector inspected the cottage and informed the Department that a certain amount of work had to be done. That work may be done, but what proof has the Minister afterwards that the work has been carried out?

If the Minister, on the recommendation of his inspector, notifies the council of the necessity for carrying out certain work, surely the onus is on the Minister to see that the work is carried out properly to the benefit of the tenant. The Minister tells the local authority to do a certain amount of work. After that, the Minister knows no more. He assumes the local authority will do the work. It is most unfair to tenants that they should become vested owners of cottages which are not in a proper state of repair and which subsequently cost the tenants a great deal of money to put into proper repair.

With regard to roads, a great deal of money is being spent on roads and credit is due to all concerned for the many improvements made. Sometimes I wonder why our roads are finished in the way they are? I wonder if we will be safe on some of our roads. After a few showers, some roads are turned almost into skating rinks. The surface is highly dangerous. If some crude oil from diesel lorries is deposited on the surface or there are a few showers after a long spell of dry weather, the most extraordinary skids occur. There is no reason why we should turn our roads into glassed-topped tables.

There is then the employment content in work on the roads. Some years ago, men employed on the roads were very happy. They knew their job would last for nine, ten or 11 months of the year. That has all changed. Over a number of years now, I have seen men starting work in April. When it comes to August, it is one week in two or three for them. That is unfair. It is a denial of their rights because they are being denied the benefits of the superannuation scheme under which they need approximately 90 days' work in the year. It was difficult enough to get that Bill passed here. Only for the hard work put into it, there would have been no results. That Bill is now on the statute book.

I fail to understand a policy which denies these men the benefit of a pension because they are denied a sufficient number of days' work to qualify for that pension. The Minister may say that is a matter for the local authority. I say it is not. I have yet to see any application from Cork —I cannot speak for other counties— for the purchase of additional machinery turned down by the Minister for Local Government.

Back in 1953, I considered it my duty to speak about this to the Taoiseach and the Minister for Local Government. That drew attention to the fact that even then we were approaching the stage of automation in local authority road work. We have gone from bad to worse and now in County Cork we are paying £6 or £6 10s. a day to a man with a tractor, with a red flag in front and another behind, to cut the grass on the brow of the dykes on the road. At one time, when a couple of men were employed on that work, at least they gave a fair return and the money they earned helped to provide the necessaries of life for a couple of families. Now, machinery is employed on many of these jobs and a few men are engaged to attend the machines. That is the result of this mad desire by local authorities, encouraged by the Minister for Local Government, to employ machinery. That has not arisen within the last three or four years. The practice existed even before that. For the last three or four years local authorities have known that they would never be refused sanction for thousands of pounds for machinery.

A certain amount of machinery is necessary but it is the excessive use of machinery, amounting to almost complete automation, on county council roads, that is creating a bad situation for many families by the fact that the wage earner is unemployed from the month of August on and has to sign for the dole for another two weeks or so and is informed at the end of the year that because he had not a sufficient number of days' employment he is without the benefit of the Act for that year again. The result in County Cork is more unemployment for men in rural areas, more employment and greater profit for the owners of machinery and, for the men, ultimately emigration. That is a problem we are facing in many areas in South Cork. The local farmers who employ, perhaps, one or two men constantly, are not looking for outside help.

Even at this late stage, if the Minister for Local Government had a thorough investigation of the amount of money being spent by local authorities on the provision of machinery or the hire of machinery for road work, instead of holding up the building of cottages in many of these areas, it would be better for himself and better for South Cork.

Deputy O'Sullivan referred to the work carried out under the Local Authorities (Works) Act. The discontinuance of that important work is deplorable. I took a natural pride in the fact that the man who instituted that scheme and got it passed by Dáil Éireann had his roots in rural Ireland, who knew the problem of people whose land was inundated with water, who realised that by encouraging local authorities by this important Act much valuable work could be done for the benefit of land owners, the general public and those seeking employment.

For some years past works under the Local Authorities (Works) Act were discontinued. The Minister, within the last 12 months, did say that any local authority may carry out such work. We know they could, provided they put up 100 per cent. of the cost. I ask Deputies to consider the amount of work given under this important heading, the results of which are known to everyone in County Cork. There was no justification for the discontinuance of that important work. If the Minister desires to improve the employment situation in County Cork for road workers, one valuable way of doing so is to reintroduce schemes under the Local Authorities (Works) Act which will also have the effect of improving many areas still awaiting drainage.

Deputy O'Sullivan and others mentioned the proposals for swimming pools. As I said yesterday at a local authority meeting, it is all very fine for members of local authorities to ask for reports from their engineers. I often wonder how long we can continue to fool the public in regard to the provision of swimming pools. When are we going to tell them about the cost? The Minister issued a circular to all local authorities. Were any figures submitted as regards the approximate cost? We know the difficulty local authorities have in meeting their commitments and collecting the rates. It is incumbent on the Minister to give some idea of the cost of providing swimming pools. He did say in the circular that indoor baths would be very expensive. We know that, but I also believe that outdoor baths would be very expensive. I am not opposing it on the basis of cost. I am anxious to know how we can meet the cost even with the proposals of the Minister to meet some of the cost through the Department.

What I am most anxious about is the location of these swimming pools. Some members of the local authority pointed out at the meeting yesterday the necessity for swimming pools in seaside resorts. I come from a seaside area. I have lived all my life by the broad Atlantic but I maintain that we must provide swimming pools, first of all, in inland areas where the people have not the benefit of natural swimming facilities. The Minister could help by giving guidance or suggestions to local authorities that in preparing such schemes they should concentrate first on the provision of swimming pools in inland areas far removed from seaside resorts. We want to see our seaside resorts improved but it is of equal importance to afford to people in inland areas the benefits which they could have by the provision of swimming pools.

The Minister did not go far enough in this circular to local authorities. He did not point out the importance of starting in inland areas first. It will take years before this problem can be solved or nearly solved. It is important, therefore, to start with the inland areas.

Then there is the question about which we have heard so much for a long time back, the question of piped water supplies. I am all for it, but I am all for telling the public the truth about it. I remember a few months ago when we were expecting information at a meeting of the local authority about the programme of piped water supplies for South Cork. We could not get any information because, as the manager rightly explained, it would take the engineer in charge a long time to provide or prepare a report dealing with South Cork, and that was only part of the county. It was pointed out how long it would take to get the necessary information and to have it documented, prepared and presented for a meeting of the members.

While we were waiting for that information, and while we were satisfied that the delay was not caused by any official, the Minister was in a famous building in Dublin telling all and sundry who came on excursions to Dublin about the piped water supply campaign. Among the exhibits was a large map of the whole of South Cork with every house and cottage, with a line drawn from one to the other illustrating the piped water supply plan, at a time when the local authority knew nothing about it.

Surely we must start at the beginning and end at the end. Surely we must give up this window-dressing of getting the people to believe: "We have something wonderful in the Mansion House in Dublin," while we are still waiting for the preliminary reports in South Cork. I do not know if that applied to all the local authorities, but certainly there was a map of South Cork when we were still at the stage of planning. What was not explained to the people is something I think the people should know, that is, how long they may be waiting before they get a piped water supply.

When these proposals were adumbrated and published by the Minister, the people in the different areas were charmed and they got the impression that in a short time they would have no trouble except to turn on a tap. While that would apply to some people who can afford to avail of the grants to which Deputy O'Sullivan referred, I am concerned with the thousands of families who can never afford to avail of such grants. I told those people—and I think I told them the truth—that a tapped water supply in the rural areas will be something like the E.S.B. in the 1930's, roughly, when they started lighting up some villages, but many villages have yet to get rural electrification. I believe water in the tap will be the same. Perhaps in a year or two some villages will get it, and perhaps in 30 years, many of them will be still without it.

The southern committee of the council in Cork have offered to do their share. I was a party to agreeing to provide £200,000 during the next five years as part of a plan, the cost of which we do not know at this stage. I am taking a chance. I believe that even if it is an imposition on the rates, it is our duty and the duty of everyone who carries responsibility to help his neighbour to get this amenity. We are as far from knowing the ultimate cost or anything like it as we were at the introduction of the Health Bill in the 1952-53 period.

I consider, therefore, that it should be made known to the people. I read articles in a certain Sunday newspaper, Sunday after Sunday, by men in different spheres of life—professional men, county managers and other people—expressing their views. With one or two exceptions, I found they all took the line of encouraging the people to believe that there would be water in the taps in a very short time. I consider that the truth is essential. A Minister should tell the truth, no matter what Government may be in power, whether it be Fianna Fáil or any other Government. I believe the truth is that in 30 years' time many a village in rural Ireland will still be looking for a piped water supply.

We are still suffering in local government from the bugbear of the power of the few while we know so much is the responsibility of the many. For many years, of course, certain associations were illegal and in correspondence and discussions with the Minister on many occasions I pointed that out. Of course we know what brought it around to the point where they were brought to the stage of being made legal. We know what happened when they got negotiating licences. The Minister is a member of a local authority and the people in Donegal are now having the experience which we have had. The managerial system, I hold, to a certain degree can give benefits where we get co-operation between managers, officials and members, but we have come to the stage where the local authorities are, as it were, the preserves of the county managers. That does not lead to the healthy co-operation we would all wish for.

I know that men of different political Parties and opinions are anxious to bale out from membership of local authorities because they find so often that they are nothing more than rubber stamps in the hands of the county managers. County managers should in their own way be county co-operators. Where the county manager is prepared to trample not only on the views but on every angle of responsibility that should be the responsibility of members, we have reached a situation at which the local authorities and local government cannot thrive in the manner we would wish in these areas.

These remarks are based on hard experience and they represent the views of members of the Minister's Party as well as those of members of the Labour Party. I would say to the Minister that, first of all, they should not have got negotiating licences. Secondly they should have no right to go to the Custom House, have discussions with the Minister and decide among themselves what line they will take, and have the proposals of one county manager put into operation in other counties as well. That will not help us, and if it continues, the day will come when either local government, as we know it in these areas, will be a complete failure and fiasco, in the hands of local dictators, or the local dictators will have to move with the stream.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

I do not propose to contribute very much to this debate beyond saying that the Vote for the Department of Local Government, next to the Vote for the Department of Agriculture, is considered as being of the greatest possible concern to rural Ireland.

The previous speaker referred to the housing situation. It is only right that in this annual review of the working of the Department of Local Government, we should make it known that the housing position is far from satisfactory. Most of the Deputies associated with local authorities are very familiar with the many difficulties with which local authorities are faced in regard to housing. I feel it is the bounden duty of the State to see that all its citizens are entirely properly and conveniently housed. In many parts of rural Ireland today, there are numerous families who are not yet housed.

Many families who have been waiting for a house for many years have been unsuccessful in obtaining proper housing accommodation. There is a large number of families living either in the upstairs rooms of tenement houses or in slums. While there has been a very great measure of progress in regard to housing our people, much remains to be done. One would expect that the Government would have shown more concern, more drive, more interest and more energy in seeing to it that the housing position was solved to the satisfaction of local authorities.

One of the great drawbacks in regard to housing is the question of rents. In areas where the local authorities believed the working class people were in need of housing and provided such houses, the tenants were unable to avail of them because they could not pay the rents. We have had many cases of that all over the country. I have often wondered why it is not possible to build a house which could be let to the ordinary working man in receipt of from £5.10s. to £6.10s. a week at a rent of 12/- a week. I know many workers who have to pay £1 or 25/- a week. In many instances when they have periods of unemployment, either through sickness or shortage of work, and have to resort to social welfare benefits, they find that if they allow their rents to get into arrears, when they resume work again it is impossible for them to clear up their rent account.

I have known many cases in which tenants have applied for transfers from dear houses to cheaper houses. The managers have been sympathetic in many cases but they say it is not the practice to allow such transfers and they do not want to create a precedent. I would ask the Minister to request county managers to be generous and considerate in dealing with such applications. I could never understand why it was not possible for this or any other Government to provide small, attractive and cheap houses, with two little rooms and a kitchen, for old age pensioners, widows, and people who have no dependants. I know it is the first duty of the Department to provide houses for married people, particularly those with large families. But there are many old age pensioners whose families have left them. We know from experience that the old people do not like to be living with married sons or daughters who have their own families.

I often wonder why it would not be possible for every local authority, with special aid from the Department of Local Government, to provide in each urban area a number of neat, attractive houses in which the old people could end their days in happiness and comfort. I know of many cases in which the parents have been left lonely and have to depend on very limited means, in many cases only the old age pensions. People may say it is no use providing homes for those people but they are just as much entitled to a home as anyone else. As an experiment the Department should seriously consider having special housing schemes in each urban area, for which special grants would be made available even on a limited scale, to provide houses for old age pensioners and widows and those unable to qualify for the ordinary dear houses.

I want to draw the attention of the Minister to the deplorable housing position in the towns of Tullamore, Birr, Portarlington and Edenderry. A number of houses were recently erected in Edenderry, but there are not applicants for even a quarter of the houses provided. Those of us who represent that constituency know from the volume of calls and correspondence we have that there is a demand for houses in Edenderry. The Department should give special consideration to large urban areas like Birr and Tullamore and see to it that the local authority is helped in every way. The present housing subsidy is insufficient to enable local authorities to erect houses and set them at a rent the tenants can pay.

The whole housing policy of the Government should be brought into line with present day conditions. It is entirely out of date. Under the present housing regulations local authorities are unable to cope with the situation. If the Government want local authorities to build houses and set them at a reasonable rent, the least local authorities would expect from the Department is a generous measure of Government support. The Department could do much more than they are doing. The town of Portarlington is served by two local authorities, Leix County Council and Offaly County Council. I know people who have been applicants for houses there for a number of years. I know that in some council houses there are two or three families living together. Such overcrowding is most undesirable. I would ask the Department to make an examination of the housing situation in those two counties.

Far greater progress could have been made in providing the people with houses. Other Deputies referred to the housing of the small farmer. There are many small farmers throughout the country who have offered sites to the local authority to erect cottages but the local authority said it was not part of their functions to erect a cottage for a person with a valuation of £10 or £15.

An Ceann Comhairle

Could the Minister consider that without legislation?

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

He could by authorising the local authority.

Mr. Blaney

The local authority already has the authorisation and the Deputy well knows that.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

I cannot say I know it because I have not——

Mr. Blaney

I am telling the Deputy now.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

——seen it put into practice. If the Minister has authorised local authorities to erect cottages for small farmers of under £15 valuation, I can tell him they are not doing so. If I have a guarantee from the Minister that a local authority can erect a cottage for a person under £15 valuation, I shall be very pleased to make an announcement at the next meeting of my local authority and ask small farmers to come forward and offer sites. Of course, the Minister knows he will not be in office by the time it comes up for sanction, but I will be very interested in the result.

Mr. Geoghegan

Why does the Deputy not ask his county manager?

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

The housing of the small farmer is of the greatest importance in rural Ireland today. The small farmer cannot be expected to erect a house for himself. The reason you cannot expect him to erect the house for himself is that no house of any kind can be erected for less than £1,200. It is more for an ordinary county council cottage at the present time. When he applies for his grant he may not be successful in obtaining a small dwellings loan from the county council. Where is he to meet the balance of the money?

There ought to be a special scheme for this purpose. If the county councils have already declined to erect cottages for small farmers, why does the Minister not immediately send a circular to the local authorities saying he has had complaints from Deputies from rural Ireland to the effect that small farmers are not being provided by the local authorities with houses, that a scheme should be initiated with the least possible delay and proposals furnished to him whereby the local authority will undertake to provide small farmers with houses?

This is probably one of the greatest drawbacks in rural Ireland today, that small farmers, many of them living on holdings of under £15 valuation, live in the real old time mud-walled thatched house. The day of the mud-walled thatched house is gone. If local authorities have that power and authority it is the duty of the Minister to see they exercise it and to advise local authorities that a scheme should be formulated immediately to provide small farmers with houses and arrangements made forthwith to see that in all cases where such houses are required they will be provided. The position in regard to housing is most unsatisfactory. We are not ungrateful for or unmindful of all that has been done, but there is a great deal that remains to be done. We have a long, winding and difficult road to travel before our entire housing needs are completed.

I want to join with other Deputies in expressing my condemnation of the action of the Minister for Local Government and the Government as a whole in relation to the Local Authorities (Works) Act. The Local Authorities (Works) Act was one of the greatest mediums for the provision of employment in rural Ireland. Very valuable work was carried out under that Act and keen disappointment is now felt that local authorities are not empowered to continue works under that Act. The value of the Local Authorities (Works) Act is only now being appreciated. The great benefits which it bestowed on local authorities were only realised when this Government deprived the local authorities of those benefits. I suppose it would be sufficient to say that the moment there is a change of Government one of the first steps of that Government will be the reintroduction of the Local Authorities (Works) Act. I imagine Deputy O'Donnell, the former Minister for Local Government, will agree with me in giving that undertaking.

Mr. O'Donnell

We give that undertaking.

Mr. Blaney

That is two of you agree so.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

Yes, we agree, to the disappointment, disgust and probably to the shame of the Minister for Local Government. We give that undertaking to all county council workers who are now out of work because of the non-functioning of that Act, to all members of local authorities and to the ratepayers who are now paying additional rates because of the lack of the generous State provision under the Local Authorities (Works) Act, that the moment the change of Government comes before the end of this year the Local Authorities (Works) Act will be functioning full steam ahead to carry out these works and to provide much needed additional employment in rural Ireland.

On an occasion such as this it is only right to make reference to certain kinds of roads. Generous State grants have been provided for main roads. We have been concentrating too much on the main roads which are being made speedways for rich men's high-powered cars and the sooner we realise that there are such things are culs-de-sac, county roads, by-roads and lanes, the better. The big bulk of the rates comes from the culs-de-sac, from what are known as the non-scheduled roads, the laneways, the county roads and the by-roads. The majority of ratepayers, and their children, those living down the culs-de-sac and other such places when they come out to go to the church or when the children are going to school in the wintertime are often knee deep in water. Sometimes the children have to remain at home because of flooded lanes and county roads in wintertime. I often wonder how they feel when they see tens of thousands of pounds being expended on main roads in order that the rich man may drive quicker and smoother.

It is the duty of the State and of the Government to see to it that the culs-de-sac, by-roads and laneways are properly maintained. The many ratepayers living down culs-de-sac do not enjoy the steamrolled road or tarmacadam roads which are usually seen on the approach to all golf courses. Whether they are adjacent to the main road or off the main road, they are all tarmacadamed and properly steamrolled and in many instances have whitewashed cobblestones along them.

This may be very amusing to the Minister but this is the very type of speech the Minister himself will be making in Donegal before the year is out. The time has come when serious action should be taken to ensure that the people in the heart of the country, on the slopes of mountains and in the valleys are provided with proper ways of getting to town, of getting their children to school and getting to church on Sundays. In most parts of rural Ireland culs-de-sac have been completely neglected because too much attention has been paid to main roads. Local authorities have not taken over sufficient culs-de-sac, laneways and by-roads because the Department of Local Government has not given the lead in affording assistance towards having them taken over and put into a proper state of repair.

I wish to refer to housing grants. I cannot say if other Deputies have criticised the administration of the reconstruction grants or the grants in connection with new houses, but I want to pay a very special tribute to the speed and efficiency of the section of the Minister's Department dealing with grants for new houses and with grants for reconstruction. If every other section of the Local Government Department were as efficient as the housing section little difficulty would be experienced.

It was said here that many complaints were made about delays. If there are delays, it is because there are not sufficient inspectors in the Department to cope with the volume of work. We know there are more people now availing of housing grants, more people building houses and more people seeking grants. There is a greater demand upon the services of the Local Government Department in regard to housing activities. I fail to understand why that section of the Department is not staffed to a greater degree. I trust that this will go on record. While the Minister has many fine qualities, he is not noted for his courtesy. That cannot be said about the officers of his Department, particularly the officers of the housing section. Like a great many other Deputies, I have occasion to address communications to them very frequently and I have found nothing but the greatest courtesy, assistance, attention and speed in relation to reconstruction grants and grants for new houses.

We do not expect the impossible to be done. The impossible cannot be done with such a limited staff. I would ask the Minister and the senior officers of his Department to see to it that if they want greater efficiency in that regard, they should increase the staff dealing with reconstruction grants. I know that unavoidable delays may take place between the final inspection and payment. The real fault is this matter of understaffing and I trust something will be done to increase the appropriate staffs.

Deputies made reference to the piped water supplies scheme. Like Deputy Desmond, I am all for that scheme, but, as a member of a local authority, I have sounded a number of ratepayers and I find that the people of rural Ireland are very suspicious of the scheme. Why are they suspicious of the scheme? They are suspicious of the cost. Why are they suspicious of the cost? They are suspicious of the cost because they were told in this House in relation to rates by the Minister for Health that the cost of the Health Act would be 2/- in the £. What is it today?

They were told by the E.S.B. in connection with rural electrification that the overhead charges would not be increased. They took in the electricity and no sooner was it in than the overhead charges were increased. Faith was broken with them in regard to the Health Act and there was a breach of faith by the E.S.B. The Local Government Department are now proposing a piped water supply scheme in every village in rural Ireland. The main difficulty there is its cost.

We have now reached the stage in this country when the rates have at last gone beyond the paying capacity of the people. The payment of rates has now become a major problem. I have often wondered what the position will be in a few years if the Health Act is to add to the rates again, if the cost of additional housing is to go on the rates and if the roads are to go on the rates and on top of all that, the piped water supplies scheme. It must be borne in mind that the local authorities have a responsibility to the ratepayers and this House has a responsibility to the ratepayers. We have now in 1961 reached the very point of exhaustion of patience on the part of the ratepayers.

They find that their incomes have been dropping steadily. If they are on the land, their incomes are dropping. If they are shopkeepers, they have fewer customers and less is being sold over the counter so that their income has dropped. We have many instances of ratepayers finding it more difficult to pay the rates year after year. We have editorials in the national and provincial papers in regard to the rates. We have pronouncements by the leaders of the Church in relation to rates. We have pronouncements on the rates by the local authorities and all sections of the community. We had pronouncements from trade unions, from Macra na Feirme and other agricultural organisations.

But what is being done about the rates? I feel the time has come when very serious action in the form of a progressive policy will have to be taken in relation to the rates. Something will have to be done to relieve the local authorities and to pass that relief on to the already overburdened ratepayers throughout the country. We are fast reaching the stage at which the ratepayers will be unable to pay. It is not that they do not want to pay because there are no better payers than the people of rural Ireland. No people pay more quickly or more readily. A position has now been arrived at in which the demands upon them have been substantially increased while, at the same time, their income has steadily decreased. That is a matter which the Department of Local Government should seriously examine. I trust no time will be lost in letting the country know what the Government have in mind providing a very substantial measure of relief for the already overburdened ratepayers in this country.

As I am dealing with rates, I want to refer to one matter which is of concern to my constituency. It is a matter of which I trust the Minister will take note. I am not satisfied that in County Offaly Bord na Móna, who own most extensive property there, are paying sufficient rates. I feel that the Department of Local Government has a duty to consult with the Offaly County Council and see to it that Bord na Móna are properly rated on all the property they possess in that county.

It is all very fine to say that the small farmer of Offaly must pay his rates, that the small man with his water-logged holding must pay his rates and that the large farmer with good arable land must pay his rates. Both the E.S.B. and Bord na Móna in Offaly are well-to-do State-subsidised bodies. We are told they are paying their way. They should be made to pay what is considered a proper rate.

I am satisfied that the general public are already overrated whist people like the E.S.B. and Bord na Móna are, so to speak, getting away with murder in relation to their property in County Offaly. The ratepayers of the county are "copping it on". There has been a discussion in the local authorities on this matter, and I feel there must be a file on it in the Local Government Department.

I hope the Minister will see to it that Bord na Móna and the E.S.B. will pay the last penny of rates upon the property they possess in the same way as the men and women in Tullamore, Birr and Edenderry must pay.

Mr. Cunningham

The Deputy might get some other county to make the rate free.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

We only want to see that justice is done. There are no people more welcome in the midlands than the E.S.B. and Bord na Móna, but they have to pay rates and they should be made pay rates. I cannot understand how the small farmers in my area are made to pay rates in accordance with their valuation. I cannot understand how the small businessman, who puts a new pane of glass in his shop window, is made to pay an increased rate. In my opinion Bord na Móna and the E.S.B. should be made pay their full rates.

Their transport is making use of the roads and the lanes of County Offaly. If they are using the roads and the lanes and if they have houses on sites in the county, they should be made to pay in accordance with the proper terms of valuation. I hope that steps will be taken to see that justice will be done in that area and that the small people, the small farmers and others will not be mulcted in increased valuations where Bord na Móna and the E.S.B. seem to be able to get away with it. I leave it at that in the hope that some action will be taken. It is of the greatest possible importance that it should. I feel that, on inquiry, the Department will see that the rate demands both on the E.S.B. and Bord na Móna certainly in present circumstances are not commensurate with the amount of property they possess.

There is one other matter which I feel I must compliment the Minister for mentioning, that is, the manner in which many of our beaches at seaside resorts are allowed to get, not only into a bad condition but into a very dangerous condition as a result of reckless people throwing about broken jam pots, broken bottles, glass, litter and dirt of every kind. One would expect that people on the beaches and at the seaside generally would display a little more civic spirit. I am glad the Minister has appealed to members of this House and to members of local authorities to use whatever influence they have in that regard.

It is a most shocking and dangerous thing to throw broken bottles on the beaches where children in bare feet run and play. In many cases, as the tide comes in the broken bottles are covered and children very often suffer severe injuries because of broken glass. All that pain and misery is caused by people who do not think.

I feel that at our beaches and at our seasides there should be sufficient notices and that receptacles should be provided for refuse. Glass bottles, jars and other rubbish that people are inclined to throw on the beach should be deposited in an orderly manner in containers or taken home. I have seen many tincans thrown on beaches. People had brought tinned fruit with them to enjoy a meal by the seaside. Without thought, the tin was thrown away. The open tin could probably be the means of cutting the foot completely off a child going in to swim.

The Minister is quite right in his reference to this subject. I hope all local authorities in seaside areas and particularly in our maritime counties will see to it that the beaches are properly noticed and that there is ample provision for the disposal of rubbish. For the safety of children and others on the beaches, the Minister's appeal must be given serious attention.

I cannot see evidence of any work carried out in my constituency, at any rate, under the Derelict Sites Act. Probably it is too early yet to view the results. In many cases in which our towns competed in the tidy towns competition, some most unsightly sights were to be seen. I hope and trust the officers of the Department will keep an eye on the progress of local authorities in removing horrid eyesores and clearing deplorable derelict sites. I do not propose to name any towns but practically every town has a derelict site of one kind or another and many towns have too many of them.

The local authorities should take the necessary action to compel the owners to deal with derelict sites. Alternatively, I hope they will take action under that Act to ensure that derelict sites are cleared and so brighten up the appearance of our towns and villages which unfortunately possess too many unsightly sites today.

I want to make a last reference on this Estimate to the growing influence of the association referred to by the last speaker, the County Managers' Association. The County Managers' Association has grown to be a very powerful association. The Minister may not think it is as powerful as it is.

If the County Managers' Association dictate what wages are to be paid to road workers and what line of policy should be taken in relation to the supervision of road workers, I feel the association is taking matters out of the hands of local authorities and also out of the hands of the Minister for Local Government. I am very surprised the Minister for Local Government, who is the impartial head of the Department and to whom all county managers are subject, permits the Custom House to give such a favourable ear to the county managers.

The county managers usually deal with matters affecting themselves— better conditions, fewer duties and more uniform duties for county managers. I feel their recommendations have been taken too seriously by the Department of Local Government. County managers should be made to understand that they are the servants of the local authorities. They should be made to recognise that the Minister for Local Government is the supreme head in the Custom House and the man in charge of the county managers.

I feel that the Custom House is losing its independence in so far as local government is concerned. It would be a bad day if the Department of Local Government should lose its independence in that regard. Matters are discussed by the County Managers' Association, such as the cutting down of a road worker's rate of pay and then representations are made to the Custom House asking the Custom House not to sanction a rate of pay beyond such and such a figure, having regard to the capacity of the people to pay. Again, the scheme is carefully planned and carefully outlined by the county managers. I have no regard for that association.

I hope and trust that the incoming Government will not view with any degree of seriousness any recommendations that come from the County Managers' Association. The discussion of the full position in relation to road workers by the County Managers' Association is something with which members of this House cannot agree. There are road workers today in practically every county in Ireland, but there are fewer road workers in most counties than ever before. Reasons have been given such as more machinery. Another reason is that on the retirement or death of a road worker, there is never a replacement.

In many cases, when gangers retire the ordinary road worker is given the book and he does the ganger's work for an ordinary road worker's pay. We have seen that in many cases. I fail to see why some arrangements have not been made between the Minister and the trade unions to give the road worker more independence and more security.

We all know very well that road workers are not paid as they should be paid. Their rates of pay are entirely too low at present. The tendency is for every county manager to cut them out completely if he can. That is a matter in respect of which there should be intervention by the Minister.

Proposals for increases of pay in various counties have not been considered by the Minister and have not been decided without consultation first with the County Managers' Association. I think that is wrong. That state of affairs in Local Government should not be allowed to continue. The Minister, or any Minister in that office, should show a great degree of independence over county managers. When the Minister issues a direction he should see that that direction is obeyed forthwith. I know that the County Managers' Association has a lot of influence in the Custom House. I regret that because it deprives the Minister of his rightful functions over them and it allows undue influence to trespass on the impartiality of the Custom House. It is wrong and improper that Local Government should be sponsored in that way. I hope steps will be taken in the future to see that there is less attention paid to a section of highly paid officials who are planning how they can hoodwink the Minister into doing something which they believe should be Government policy. Government policy should be dictated by the Minister and only the Minister. Those who try to dictate Government policy other than the Minister should bet told "where to get off." The laying down of policy is a matter for the Minister and it should be laid down in this House. I believe local government is lacking in that respect today.

I should like to pay tribute to the former Minister for Local Government, Deputy O'Donnell, for his courageous stand on many occasions in this respect. I should also like to pay tribute to the courage and ability of his predecessor in office, the late Tim Murphy. His sincerity and his courageous rule from the Custom House will not be forgotten. I wish that today we had a Minister in the Custom House who was the same type as the former Minister and the late Tim Murphy. The late Deputy Murphy has left behind him a monument of constructive work. That work was continued by Deputy O'Donnell and by the late Deputy Keyes. What is wanting in the Department today is leadership, determination and ability, and above all the courage to "tell off" where telling-off is required. Work will not be carried out and policy will not be implemented until somebody is there to carry out the obligations for which the Minister is held responsible, the whole way down from the top to the bottom.

Mr. Manley

I do not wish to prolong this already protracted debate. I suppose it is to be expected that a debate such as this would be protracted because the majority of members of this House are also members of various local authorities throughout the country. They can speak with a knowledge and an intimacy which an outsider could not command. From my own county we have 17 members in this House, including members from Cork City, and of those, 16 are members of local authorities, I myself being the only black sheep. Therefore, the points I shall make are the points of an outsider.

We have a system of local government that is very attractive and one that is very hard to beat, provided it does not lose its democratic pattern. We have the managerial system and I believe it is well we have a system that could be rigid against modern trends. There was a great deal of criticism of the system in the past, but I think the system has outlived that criticism and has proved itself effective. Local government is the administration that is most closely associated with the people and it is an administration in which the local people take a very keen interest.

For that reason they look upon our local bodies as the guardian of their rights. Even though local bodies have been stripped considerably of their powers, they are still the watchdogs of the democratic rights of the people. Even though, in recent years, we have built up a sort of local bureaucracy I think that was inevitable. We have in that system magnificent officials and I think Deputies from Cork will agree with me when I say that in Cork City and county we have officials and county services second to none. They are officials who face their obligations objectively, impartially and efficiently at all times and treat the people with the courtesy we find amongst our civil servants. They are really on a par with the services here at national level. I have two criticisms to make. It may be regarded as treason for me to give utterance to them, but they are my sentiments and I would be failing my own convictions and my own conscience if I refrained from referring to them now.

First of all, it is a pity that members of this House are also members of local authorities. If men get elected to this House through the prestige and patronage they built up for themselves while members of the local authorities, I think they should resign from the local authorities and give all their time to national affairs associated with this House. Because Deputies and Senators are members of local authorities, they tend to monopolise the time of the local authorities and preclude others who would be very good local administrators, and who would take a lively interest in such affairs, from coming into local bodies. I have met such people who would not contest local elections because of the fact that so many Deputies and Senators were contesting these elections.

It is rather tragic, I think, that local elections are fought on a Party basis. We had evidence of that during recent weeks when there was a regular Party lineup on all occasions when chairmen were being elected to the various local authorities. The fact that these come in, brings politics immediately into our local councils. Our local administrators are rightly objective about local affairs. I think it is taking Party policits to the fair to introduce such matters into our local discussions. It is regrettable. At one time the Cumann na nGaedheal Party and the Labour Party refrained from contesting these elections on Party lines. I wish wiser counsels would again prevail and men of good sense would see the futility of having a build-up of this kind, a build-up that may be dangerous in the future, that might present a challenge to democracy if we stick too rigidly to Party lines in discussions and decisions in local matters.

I have heard references here to county managers. I have heard it said that they are bureaucratic on occasions. They have to be because of the suspicion that this build-up in local bodies engenders. Parties are contending against one another and the officials must of necessity be careful, cautious and reticent—perhaps even uncooperative on some occasions— because of the fear they have that there is something sinister behind the motives of those who approach them with regard to certain matters. I am not casting any aspersions whatever on the members of local authorities. I have the greatest admiration for them. They give of their time and energy. They are self-sacrificing in their administration of local affairs. They are at the beck and call of everybody.

Of recent years these calls have increased considerably. Health legislation and other legislation have had their impact. Being a member of a local authority is a whole-time job today. It is because of that that I stress the danger that politics may become a business and, the more of a business they become, the greater the danger of corruption in our local authorities. The Fluoridation Act and the Road Traffic Bill will put yet more responsibility on local authorities. They will have to make regulations for the implementation of this legislation. They will have to provide the revenue to cover the cost of implementation.

That brings me to the question of rates. Rates are a nightmare for everybody at the moment. They are a cause of serious concern to householders. No effort is being made to keep rates at a reasonable level. I have one suggestion to make. It may necessitate legislation but I put it forward for consideration. We have had a good deal of legislation in this House over the last twelve months in the way of reform. One way of stabilising local expenditure and thereby stabilising rates would be to strike a rate for a period of three or five years. The local authority could then plan ahead for three or five years, knowing exactly the amount of revenue they would be handling in that period. Indeed, such a reform might create the possibility of definite progressive planning.

We still adhere to a system of rate collectors. I bear no enmity towards any rate collector but I cannot understand why we should stick to such an antiquated system. It may have been necessary in the past but our people today have grown accustomed to paying their electricity bills once every two months, their annuities to the bank twice in the year. There is no reason why they could not pay their rates to a central office. In Cork a good percentage of the rates is collected in the county council offices at one-third the cost of collection by rate collectors. When the present rate collectors are pensioned off, they should not be replaced. Responsibility for collection should be handed over to the central office.

There is a motion on the Order Paper tabled by the Labour Party that rates should be collected by instalments. That will increase the cost if collection is done by rate collectors. If the rates are paid into a central office instalments could be taken at a minimum cost. Strange to say, one of the powers retained by local authorities is the power to appoint rate collectors and in the past year there was some unpleasantness with regard to the appointment of rate collectors. I do not know why that power should be left in the hands of local representatives. I am sure they would have no objection to being deprived of this power.

The continued rapid increase in rates in recent years has done more to kill initiative and stop people taking progressive action in relation to their homes and farms than has anything else that I know of. Our islanders around the coast pay rates. They can never enjoy the amenities that the mainland possesses. This year the people on Cape Clear have paid only half the rate. They have held the other half. I believe no rate should be demanded from them. They have no motor cars. They have no electricity. They lack many of the amenities we have on the mainland. They have hardships and handicaps to face. The least we might do is not ask them to pay rates remembering they can never enjoy the benefits that rates are supposed to provide. There are two cars on Cape Clear but there are no tarmacadam roads, and there never will be.

Our engineers are to be complimented on the magnificent work done on our main roads. Like others, I sometimes thought that the work was almost of too good quality but an engineer told me some years ago that they took the long view. No doubt, he was right. There are by-roads in urgent need of repair. We must be reaching saturation point in improving our main roads. The time has come when we should do something about our by-roads. There is a grant available from the Rural Improvements Scheme for these roads. The objective is a laudable one but it is sometimes difficult to get all those using the road to cooperate. I think these roads should be taken over and the work should be done by the local authority. They have the machinery. The farmers could supply some of the material, such as gravel and stone, and in that way make their contribution under the scheme.

Much comment was made here this evening on the subject of housing. I put it to the Minister that a little more discretion should be allowed to housing authorities in the matter of standards required in reconstruction cases. I have in mind a case in which the Minister was sympathetic where a farmer reconstructed a house and the rooms provided in that reconstruction did not measure up to the eight feet standard but were, in fact, only seven feet. The house was on top of a hill and, I contend, would have as much ventilation as the most luxurious house in this city. I do not see the necessity for rigid enforcement to the maximum degree of that regulation.

Regional water schemes were referred to. I agree with other Deputies that such schemes are very desirable but it is rather frightening when one considers the extent to which such schemes will impinge on the rates and the people may find themselves very annoyed that such a scheme was put in train at all. No matter how desirable it may be, we must consider the people who will pay for it.

In some cases, regional schemes could be economically undertaken where there is a chance of having a gravity flow but this whole question should be approached with caution because those people who, with their own capital and with grants available from the Department of Local Government, have already provided their homes with water and sanitation will be peeved on being asked now to provide these amenities for their neighbours. That is one of the reasons this matter should be examined with the greatest care so that it may be realised what it will ultimately mean to those people.

The last speaker complimented the Minister on his remarks with regard to beaches. Those remarks should include roads and the countryside generally. Our people have a bad civic sense in that respect. It is detestable that litter, old motor cars and other rubbish should be dumped in gullies beside the road or other public places. People should have sufficient civic sense, sufficient prudence and judgment to realise that they should not use the highways for dumping matter of that kind. I have seen dock roots thrown on the side of the road, and in some instances main roads. That is most reprehensible and should be discouraged. I hope the remarks the Minister has made about beaches will apply to the countryside generally.

The tidy towns competition has created civic pride and has helped to encourage greater effort in recent years in the elimination of abuses of that kind. It has inculcated a realisation in the people of their civic duty and has created the ambition to have their town capable of qualifying, if not for a prize, at least for a recommendation.

We are glad to notice from the Minister's statement that the total capital expenditure shows a gradual decrease, due to the progress made in housing. That is very comforting but it is not so comforting when one realises that the Department contemplate expenditure of £59,000,000 in the current year. That £59,000,000 must be provided by the people. That is all the more reason why our people take such an interest in local administration. They realise that they will have to meet in the rates the cost of whatever amenities are provided for them.

Mr. Tierney

As a rural Deputy and a member of a county council, I consider this a very important Estimate. First, I should like to congratulate the Minister on giving county councils an increased amount of money for the upkeep of the roads and on giving them the option to transfer moneys from main roads to county roads. County roads are becoming more important every day. In 1922, when Local Government was established, we had a main road complex but with the developments and popularity of the motor car, the county roads are being used to a much greater extent. Our arterial roads are up to a standard comparable with that in any country of the same size and population. If we are to make progress in providing better service for the people and creating employment, more money should be allocated for county roads. The Minister has already done that in a small way. He has given power to county councils to direct certain money to county roads which they had not got before. Persons representing rural areas appreciate that.

Some years ago, I raised the question of the provision of houses for small farmers. When any Minister, past or present, makes an announcement about increased grants for housing, he seems to assume that those grants will be availed of by the majority of the small farmers, forgetting that there are a vast number of people who are not able to avail of grants, simply and solely because they cannot provide the balance to the contractor. I ask the Minister to bear in mind that an average country house today costs £1,600 to £2,000 to build. While the Government give generous grants of up to £275, and the local authority gives a similar grant of £275, there is still a big gap for the average small farmer I am interested in to meet between the sum of these grants and, say, £1,600 or £2,000.

Whether we like it or not, there are a vast number of people in the country who work hard and are still not able to make up that deficiency, and are living in bad houses. I have no objection to going on the records of this House as saying that if grants are to be given, they should be given on valuation. Various grants have been given by different Governments—I am not blaming the Minister—to people who could afford to sit down and write a cheque, or walk into a bank and draw money to make up the deficiency between the Local Government grant, the local authority grant, and the price of the house.

The Minister has given a direction to the county councils to build for a certain type of small farmer. The Minister's circular to the county councils had a specific purpose, but various county councils are reading into it that that specific purpose is that where a small farmer with 11, 12 or 13 acres qualifies for a house, it should be built for him by the local authority. I do not look on those people as small farmers; I look upon them as unqualified labourers. There may be people with 25, 30 or 40 acres rearing families in poor circumstances, and they will not get any help from the local authorities or the Minister. I am appealing to the Minister to try to put through a scheme under which those people who are not able to meet the charges involved in building a house for themselves will be helped by the Department of Local Government and the local authorities to make up the deficit in the purchase price, without the full impact falling on the local authorities.

In North Tipperary, there is a very peculiar position. In the southern part of Tipperary we have a piped water supply which is working fairly well, in my opinion. Our county manager brought a piped water supply scheme before the North Tipperary County Council, of which I am a member. I opposed that scheme fairly bitterly at our meeting, not because I believed the people did not want a piped water supply—I firmly believe the people do require a piped water supply—but because before we got a piped water supply, I wanted to find out what it would cost the ratepayers. We were never able to find out what exactly the total cost would be. Some members put it at about 11/- in the £ but in his statement the manager could not give us even a rough idea of the cost. I hope I am not quoting him wrongly. He seemed to think that 9/-in the £ would cover only part of North Tipperary and that part of Lower Ormonde would not come under the scheme because there was an old gravity supply which would have to be supplemented with piped or pumped water.

I opposed that in the belief that 70 per cent. of North Tipperary would get no benefit from it. Since then, the Minister has sent down to North Tipperary an official from his Department advocating a group water supply scheme in the parishes around North Tipperary. I ask the Minister to make up his own mind. He is pressing the county councils to have a piped water supply scheme for the whole country and, at the same time, he is sending down officials from his Department who hold meetings in the various parishes advocating that they should have a group water supply scheme.

The position as I see it is that if in any parish in North Tipperary a group of people decide to have a group water supply scheme as advocated by the Minister's officials, who said that it could vary to as much as a £ for £ valuation, we must consider the farmer or anyone else with a £25 or £35 valuation. After they pay on a £ for £ valuation, even if it is only £10, £20, £30 or £40, and after they decide on a group water supply scheme, the Minister then presses the county council, or the county council decide, to have a piped water supply scheme. They are then in the position that a progressive group on their own initiative, with the help of the Minister of course, have a group water supply scheme on a £ for £ valuation and the county council or the Minister then introduces a piped water supply scheme for which they must pay separately. I ask the Minister to make up his mind whether he will press for group water supply schemes or a piped water supply scheme for the whole country.

I should like to draw the Minister's attention to what I consider is a very serious flaw in the group water supply scheme as outlined by the official of his Department. He explained to the people that they could put through a group water supply scheme and he outlined the various charges on the £ for £ valuation roughly. He said they had to get in a pumped water supply from the E.S.B. When he was asked what the charge would be for the people getting the group water supply, he said it would be based on the E.S.B. charge. The Minister knows that various groups of people have been by-passed by the E.S.B. in the rural electrification scheme because the Board said it would be uneconomic to connect them. In other cases, people did not accept the supply when it was passing close to their house. When they wanted to avail of the supply at a later stage, these people had to pay a special service charge.

If the group water supply is to be based on the E.S.B. charges, does it mean that those people who had to pay three or four times the normal charge for electricity will have to pay three or four times the normal charge for the group water scheme? Those people were victimised because the E.S.B. felt it was uneconomic to link them up or because they did not avail of the supply when it was passing close by. Are they to be victimised again in the water supply scheme because they were not able to avail of the electricity? The Minister should at least ensure that they will not be mulcted in the E.S.B. pumping charges.

The Minister referred to my county in his opening statement and said that the cost of the entire scheme in South Tipperary would be 5/- in the £. We have had experience of Ministers' statements. I remember attending, as chairman of North Tipperary County Council, a meeting in Limerick representative of five county councils— Limerick, South Tipperary, North Tipperary, Clare and Galway. A particular Minister was introducing the health scheme. He told us that when the scheme was in full operation, the charge on the rates would not be more than 2/- in the £; but today, though the scheme is not in full operation, the cost to the rates in North Tipperary is over 11/- in the £. I know the Minister has more figures than I have, and he says South Tipperary will get the whole scheme for 5/- in the £, but I should like to see the figure when everything is completed.

We are in an awkward position in North Tipperary. Except for one portion of the county, we have no gravity supply schemes and we have to get piped water schemes in other areas. While I welcome any water supply scheme for rural Ireland, we should consider carefully before going into this and try to do as much as we can for the people we represent. Rightly or wrongly, we are criticised about the increase in the rates, and we must be wary before jumping into anything. I honestly think we are going about this in the wrong way. The Minister should first try to get from the various local authorities what the cost of this scheme would be in the various counties. He should then put to the local authorities what the scheme would cost and they should ask if the people are prepared to pay for it.

Under the group system—I am not sure if this applies to piped water supplies—if a person received a grant from the Department of even £10 for a single tank, he would not receive any grant whatever under the group scheme. The Minister can, therefore, understand why there is opposition to this scheme from people who have no water supply themselves but who have received a small grant. I am only pointing that out to the Minister. I am not criticising his scheme. I think it is a good one. The Minister comes from rural Ireland himself. He knows that if a man has got even a few tanks, he will not benefit under the group scheme. Therefore, the Minister knows he can expect opposition in every parish. He should make the position clearer to the people who will have to accept the scheme.

In my county, there are mixed views on the vesting of labourers' cottages. County councils do not allow a sufficient amount of money per year for the carrying out of repairs for the number of people who are applying for vesting of cottages. It is our duty in the county council to provide the money but when the various Parties comprising the county council object, it is not our fault, nor perhaps the Minister's, if the money is not provided. In any event, sufficient money is not provided for the carrying out of repairs to county council cottages and a number of people who apply for vesting are put off from year to year.

When the county councils do a certain amount of repairs and when the tenant finds the repairs are not to his satisfaction, he then has the power to appeal to the Minister for Local Government, and this is possibly where the Minister or his officials are wrong. In the nine or ten years since the vesting arrangement came into force, I do not think I have met one tenant—and I was not looking for excuses from any tenant— who was satisfied with the Minister's inspector who called. I have known cases in various parts of the county where the county council have notified the prospective vested tenant that the repairs were carried out in accordance with the recommendation. When they appealed to the Minister for Local Government and he in his own way and in his own time sent down an inspector, I have yet to find as far as my area of North Tipperary is concerned that any one of the inspectors from the Department recommended helping the tenant with the extra repairs. The result is there are many people mumbling and grumbling and rightly so, that the amount of repairs supposed to have been done were not done. With their mumbling and grumbling, they are stopping their next-door neighbours from applying for vesting of their own cottages.

I am merely pointing this out to the Minister with a view to helping him or his successor, whoever he may be, to encourage these people to have their cottages vested and to keep them as happy homes. If the people do not get satisfaction from the county council or from the Minister, there is no inducement to them to have their cottages vested. I trust that the Minister during the few months in power he has left—I hope he is left longer than some people think—will make some move to remedy the situation.

Mr. Corish

That is the kindest thing that was said to the Minister for months.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

I was glad to see that in his statement the Minister devoted a good deal of his remarks to housing but I must confess I am not completely clear as to what he means in some cases and I wonder if the local authorities, both the elected representatives and the officials, will know exactly what he means. I was not here when the Minister made his speech but having a copy of it here, I see he says a circular letter issued to the local authorities in October last was designed to expand their discretion as regards the initiation of schemes to complete slum clearance. That in itself is quite clear but he goes on to say:

and also to widen the scope of the classes for whom new housing schemes might be undertaken.

A good deal has been said on housing here this evening and certain suggestions were made by some speakers with whom I find myself very much in agreement. Deputy Flanagan referred to the difficulty old age pensioners find in securing housing accommodation. That is a very live issue. In any country town, an old age pensioner has no hope whatsoever of securing accommodation. It often happens that a father and mother who have reached the age of 70 have to live in a fair-sized house with one of their grown-up children who may be married and they are doomed to occupy that house for the rest of their days. That is not always desirable. Housing grants are initiated for the specific purpose of creating as much social equality as possible and of providing a form of social assistance for those who require houses.

The Minister should, therefore, give an open ear to the suggestion made here by Deputy Flanagan that old age pensioners should be considered for a smaller type of house, maybe a two-roomed house with a kitchen, which could be built very cheaply. The span of life being what it is, these people might not occupy such a house for a long period but the Minister can be assured that in our country towns these houses would be taken up again as they became vacant.

Deputy Flanagan also referred to those living on small farms. I know several cases in my constituency of people with a low valuation living in bad houses. It often happens that older people have a younger member of the family, maybe a nephew or a niece, brought into a farm and an antiquated old house which is not a fit residence for the rearing of a young family. I know of several instances where they have applied to the local authority for housing and have been told that it was not feasible, that they should apply under the Small Dwellings Acts and build houses for themselves. As the scheme exists at present the average cost of building any sort of reasonable house is £1,500. The free grant is in the neighbourhood of £275. The local authority then advances the rest of the money up to about 75 per cent, but there is always a hiatus between the amount available and the cost of the house of around £300 or £400. I want to put it to the Minister that it is quite impossible for this type of people living on small farms to find that £300 or £400. Therefore, it is only begging the question to suggest that they should build houses for themselves when they are quite unable to do so. A person may come on to a farm where the housing accommodation is bad. A niece or a nephew may hope to rear a family thereon and it is not socially desirable that they should rear a family in a mud hut. The only chance they have is to get a new house.

The Minister said he had arranged with the Minister for Finance for these schemes to be financed by means of loans from the Local Loans Fund. That is a rather ambiguous statement, as far as I am concerned. I am not quite clear whether it will be possible for these people to fill in the requisite form for £300 or £400, that they will be able to borrow it from the Local Loans Fund and that they will be able to get a grant of 75 per cent. from the local authority. Can they then borrow from the Local Loans Fund as well, with a guarantee by the Minister for Finance to cover them? If they can, that rectifies the situation. When the Minister is replying, I think he ought to clarify that point.

I want to refer to another matter which is not confined to my constituency alone: it is common throughout the country. I had applications in these cases from outside my own constituency as well. There is no real attempt made to cater for this in rural Ireland. Possibly in Dublin there may be some scheme to deal with those people but I do not know as I am not qualified to speak for the city of Dublin. I know that in the three towns in my own constituency there are many people of the salaried class who are unable to get accommodation. I know of one specific instance where two teachers from vocational schools were forced to emigrate because their wives would not continue to live in one room paying 30/- a week. They were unable to get a house.

No new building scheme has been initiated to deal with these people. That is not peculiar to this town alone; it is to be found in every town. It is socially desirable in every country to have a strong middle class residing in an area and wedded to that area. There is nothing that produces greater stability than to have a middle class living in such an area. It is quite impossible for salaried people in the majority of towns in Ireland to settle down without some scheme to support them.

I am not a housing expert myself and I am not a member of a local authority but I am encouraged to bring this matter up on the Estimate as a result of the Minister's remarks in which he says:

A circular letter issued to housing authorities in October last was designed ... also to widen the scope of the classes for whom new housing schemes might be undertaken.

The Minister does not say any more to give us an indication as to what that means. If it is meant to cover the people to whom I have referred, I am delighted to hear it. For the Minister's information, in the town of Wexford, which is the administrative town in County Wexford, more than half the officials working there are not housed and are not likely to be housed as far as I can see in the near future. They are not only paying exorbitant rents but they are also tending to move on. I should like the Minister to bear these few points in mind in regard to the position of housing and see whether he can encourage local authorities to do something about it. The Minister may reply that these possibilities exist and that county managers have every opportunity of doing something.

I have tried over the past two or three years, realising how critical the situation is in relation to this type of person, to have schemes initiated. I have always been told that there are no schemes there. When I ask the Minister a question in Parliament, he replies that no schemes have been presented to him. I feel that unless the Minister gives a direction to county managers and points out to the housing authority that this need exists, nothing will be done about it.

Deputy Tierney was obviously conversant with the facts about which he was talking. I am wholeheartedly in agreement with him with regard to the vesting of cottages. It will save the country money and the local authorities the expense of repairs if people are allowed to vest their cottages with expedition. That is not the case in my county. In my county, there are endless delays in putting cottages into a proper state of repair so that they can be transferred to the tenant. It is to the advantage of the local authority to have that done.

Apart from the fact that there are delays in having the cottages repaired, there are also delays in introducing vesting schemes. We have some sort of antediluvian idea in Wexford of having a vesting scheme only every so often. I think it is only about two or three years. I know of people having to wait two years to have their cottages vested. With all this red tape, green tape, bureaucracy—call it what you will—that exists in regard to this question, nothing is being done and nothing is likely to be done for some considerable time.

If there is a shortage of funds, as appears to be the argument in many cases, for the purpose of reconstructing cottages, the Minister could make some sum available from the Central Fund to ensure that these houses are put into a proper state of repair. I know at least 20 houses in my constituency which the tenants would willingly take over if they could get them repaired. In fact, although I am not on the local authority, there is hardly a week goes by that I do not have a requisition from somebody who has been waiting for two years for the engineer to come to inspect the house. It is a serious state of affairs that cottages should have leaking roofs. Sometimes the windows are in a very bad state of repair. There may be small children in the house. It is extremely unhealthy to have houses in that condition.

There is another point with regard to the subject of labourers' cottages. It is more in keeping with the water supply question to which I intend to refer later on. I do not think I will have time to do so tonight. If we are to have any attempt to get a general water supply, it is very shortsighted policy to build cottages in the extremes of rural Ireland.

Some years ago, some Minister for Local Government introduced the idea of a cottage village system. We were under the impression that the new schemes for cottages were to be concentrated around the more central areas where there are schools. In such a case, a water supply could be dealt with more definitely. Except for such places as Kilkenny, in areas where there are mines, no attempt was made to centralise housing.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.

The Dáil adjourned at 11 p.m. until 2 p.m. on Wednesday, 5th July, 1961.

Dáil Éireann debate - Tuesday, 4 Jul 1961

Committee on Finance. - Vote 29—Local Government (Resumed).

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 4 Jul 1961