Vol. 202 No. 10
I move:
That a sum not exceeding £417,500 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1964, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of Public Works.
As usual, I propose to take Votes 8 and 9 together.
Vote 8 provides for the salaries and incidental expenses of the various staffs needed to administer the services for which provision is made in Vote 9. The Estimate shows a comparatively small increase of £24,740 over last year's provision. Part of the reason for this is that pay increases were recently granted to professional and technical staffs and there are some additions proposed in numbers—particularly in the national monuments and architectural services. They include twenty trainee architectural assistants recruited under the experimental scheme to which I referred when the Estimate was being taken last year. These will have completed their first year's full-time training in June and will then be available for part-time service while completing their training. It is proposed to recruit a further twenty trainees in the current year.
Vote 9 provides for the various engineering and architectural services dealt with by the Office of Public Works—as distinct from the Special Employment Schemes Office—which, of course, will be dealt with separately. These services comprise the erection and maintenance of State buildings, the care of other State property such as harbours, parks and national monuments, the erection and improvement of primary schools, the execution of arterial drainage schemes and several other miscellaneous services. The Estimate for this Vote also shows an increase over last year's provision. This is due to an expansion of activities particularly in the field of arterial drainage, and in the provision of improved accommodation for the Garda Síochána. I shall refer to these two items in more detail later.
The two main classes of works dealt with, architectural works and arterial drainage, are covered by the two major subheads of Vote 9 B and I.2. Ancillary subheads are C and J, which provide respectively for property maintenance and the purchase and maintenance of machinery. Subheads A and E cover payments for sites and premises required for State use, both here and abroad. The remaining subheads provide for the furnishing, heating, lighting, cleaning and general servicing of the various State properties.
I shall run briefly through the main subheads of Vote 9. The largest items covered by Subhead A are the purchase of sites for new Garda stations, for a new Preventive Centre for young persons at Finglas, for additional accommodation for the Department of Agriculture, and for the acquisition of property in connection with the proposed major fishery harbours.
Deputies have been furnished with a statement giving particulars of the items for which provision has been made in Subhead B and while it is hardly necessary for me to go into the details, I would like to mention some of the most important works.
Despite the adverse weather conditions early this year which hampered building construction works, good progress has been made with the extension to Leinster House and it is hoped that the work will be completed before the end of 1964. As Deputies are aware, acoustic tiling was fitted during the Summer Recess of last year to portions of the ceiling of the Chamber. It has also been decided to introduce a low level sound reinforcement system in the Chamber. The scheme provides for the installation of a total of 72 microphones mounted on the desks in front of the members with a corresponding number of speaker units to be placed between seats at ear level. The work will be carried out when the Dáil rises for the Summer Recess.
As the boilers at the Central Heating Station in Kildare Place have reached the end of their useful life, their renewal by turf-burning plant has been provided for. In addition to servicing the existing group of buildings, this plant will serve the new extension at Leinster House now under construction.
The work of rebuilding the Cross Block between the Upper and Lower yards at Dublin Castle is proceeding and is expected to be completed towards the end of this year. This will provide accommodation for about 80 heads of staff of the Revenue Commissioners.
The planning of a new building to house the Stamping Branch, the Estate Duty Office, and other staffs of the Revenue Commissioners, totalling about 300 is at an advanced stage. Before work on this building can commence, however, it will be necessary to have alternative accommodation provided for the occupants of certain existing buildings on the site. In the circumstances it is not expected that the work will commence before 1965.
Provision has been made for work on the rebuilding of the burnt out Drawing Room at the State Apartments at Dublin Castle. The adjoining block generally known as the "Bedroom Block" has been found to be unsafe and it will be demolished and rebuilt along with the Drawing Rooms.
As I indicated in reply to a recent question a maquette of a statue of Thomas Davis is to be erected in College Green, has been approved and steps have been taken for the preparation of the full scale statue. The commission is being executed by the prominent Irish sculptor Mr. Edward Delaney whose design consists of a paved platform measuring about 55 feet by 18 feet by 9 inches high with a pedestal surmounted by a bronze figure of Davis approximately 10 feet high, and a circular pool embellished with bronze reliefs depicting Young Ireland. The execution of the work is, I am advised, a matter which cannot be hurried but it is hoped that the entire scheme will be completed in about two years time.
The architectural works at the Garden of Remembrance at Parnell Square are well advanced and should be completed by the autumn. The precise form which the Memorial Sculpture will take is being considered. Progress has continued with the improvement works at Dún Laoghaire Harbour. The final stage of the works has been postponed pending a decision by British Railways on the provision of a car ferry service. A provision for the ferry terminal is being included in case the project gets under way during the year.
A total provision of £625,000 is included in Subhead B for work to be carried out by the Commissioners of Public Works on the erection of Garda stations and married quarters and improvement to existing stations, for the erection of houses for married members of the force by the National Building Agency, and on the adaptation as a recruit training centre of the former McCann Military Barracks at Templemore, where work has now reached an advanced stage. Apart from the houses being erected by the National Building Agency, contracts have been placed for 24 stations and 33 married quarters. Tenders have been invited or will shortly be invited for a further eight stations and 12 married quarters. Sites are available at 46 other centres and are in progress of acquisition for an additional 18 centres.
Deputies will be interested in the proposed memorial to Gardaí who lost their lives in the performance of duty. It has been decided that this memorial will be provided at the Depot in the Phoenix Park and it is hoped to have it erected during the year.
Last year I spoke of the acceleration in the school building programme and I mentioned that it was hoped to maintain progress in 1962-63 by placing 130 new contracts. I am glad to record that my expectations have been exceeded with the placing of 171 contracts during the year bringing the number of projects now in course of construction to 198—137 new schools and 61 major improvement schemes— compared with 98 new schools and 65 major improvement schemes this time last year. The number of projects actually completed within the last financial year was 65 new schools with 9,122 pupil places and 70 major improvement schemes giving 1,392 extra pupil places. This may seem a fall back from 1961-62, but it really is not so. It just happened that the completion in a number of cases has been somewhat delayed, mainly by the severe weather in the beginning of the financial year and in January and February of 1963. The amount of work done in the year is reflected by the expenditure which reached the record figure of £1.8 million. It is expected that progress will be maintained in the current year, as planning was completed in 148 cases—103 new schools and 45 improvement schemes—in the past 12 months, and all these cases will have reached the construction stage in the current year. The provision to meet this programme is £1.9 million.
On the development side, progress has been made with the completion of new plans for small schools, two and three classrooms, which comprise about 65-70 per cent of the schools built each year, and the first schools built to the new design were recently completed at Tenure, County Louth, and Clondalkin, County Dublin. This is the first tangible result of the programme of research and development undertaken jointly by the Department of Education and the Office of Public Works to raise the standard of facilities in primary schools so that teaching techniques can progress in line with current and probable future trends. The intention is that the schoolhouse should come to be regarded not merely as a place of instruction but as a place where all child activities, including play, can find full expression and where children are given greater scope for the development of individual and creative expression than has been possible in the more formal atmosphere of the conventional classroom. The classrooms in the new schools will be larger than those provided heretofore in small schools, and the furniture will consist of light tables and chairs which can be stacked in a corner without much trouble, to allow more diversified use of floor area.
From the architectural viewpoint, the new plan is a great improvement. Classrooms and ancillary accommodation are grouped under a single rectangular roof. The roof, which is borne on cross walls, is independent of support from the front and back walls, and is economical in the use of timber. Classrooms, toilets, and cloakrooms are so placed that each classroom can form a self-contained unit. This renders a corridor unnecessary, and the extra space gained makes possible larger classrooms and direct cross lighting and ventilation. This improved building can be provided without extra cost. Savings of some 20 per cent in drawing office time and of 30 per cent in building time are expected.
These principles will be applied in due course to the big schools built by the Commissioners. Consideration is being given also to applying the same principles to the larger schools designed by private architects engaged by the managers in collaboration with the Office of Public Works.
Provision is being made for an extension to the National Gallery of Ireland, the cost of which will be borne entirely by the Exchequer. The new building will increase the hanging space for pictures by about 50 per cent, and it will contain a lecture theatre, an office for the director, and accommodation for temporary exhibitions.
A provision of £140,000 has been made for the development of major fishery harbours at Killybegs, Castletownbere, Howth, Galway and Dunmore East. The engineering investigations necessary for the development of the outline plans prepared by Mr. Bjuke, the Swedish consultant, are proceeding. It is expected that construction work will be commenced at Killybegs, Castletownbere and Dunmore East, in the current financial year.
A sum of £43,000 has been provided for improvement works in the fishery interests at small harbours around the coast. Work is in progress at Greencastle, County Donegal; Clogherhead, County Louth, and Ballyhack, County Wexford. It is hoped to start work during the year at Ballinacarta, County Donegal; Enniscrone, County Sligo, and Duncannon, County Wexford. Proposals for Kilmore Quay, County Wexford, are being investigated.
A considerable amount of work in agricultural interests is provided for including the building of large new schools for students at Athenry and Clonakilty. The same is true of building work for the Post Office services. The largest single item among the latter is the new central sorting office in Dublin, work on which is in progress. Other major works are proceeding at Arklow, Ballinasloe, Carrick-on-Shannon, Ennis, Limerick, Wicklow and Youghal.
The detailed planning of the new headquarters for the Departments of Health and Social Welfare is at a very advanced stage and it is hoped that it will be possible to invite tenders for the construction work about the end of the year.
The subheads from C. to H.2., inclusive, do not require comment from me except perhaps in regard to the national monuments service.
Last year I referred to my interest in national monuments and the idea I had that the various interests connected with the service could be unified under one authority, possibly a semi-State body. The National Monuments Advisory Council—my letter to which body I read for you last year—are in agreement and have submitted some helpful suggestions. So is Bord Fáilte Éireann, and there appears to have been favourable reaction by the public. The matter is now being considered Departmentally: this is necessary so that details may be covered and the implications fully understood before the Government are approached. I am sure that most Deputies will have seen or at least heard about the exhibition of photographs of national monuments held in March of this year at The Building Centre, Dublin. The exhibition aroused widespread interest and was very well attended. It will be available at other centres throughout the country; in fact, I expect that it will shortly be shown at the Ulster Museum, Belfast. Arrangements are in hand, with the kind co-operation of The Building Centre and Bord Fáilte, to have it available at centres in Britain and on the Continent.
The I group of subheads deals with arterial drainage and embankment construction works and associated services. Construction works are proceeding on the following five major catchment schemes: the Corrib-Clare in Counties Galway, Mayo and Roscommon; the Inny in Counties Cavan, Longford, Meath and Westmeath; the Maine in County Kerry; the Moy in Counties Mayo, Roscommon and Sligo and the Deel in Counties Limerick and Cork.
In addition, works are in progress in two minor catchments of the Broadmeadow in Counties Dublin and Meath and the Killimor in County Galway. Embankment reconstruction and repair schemes are in hand on the upper Fergus estuary in County Clare and the northern bank of the Shannon estuary (Coonagh section).
The total cost of all schemes completed or in hands amounts to over £16 million benefiting some 400,000 acres of land. Embankment schemes for the Ballynaclough section of the Shannon estuary chain of embankments and for the lower Fergus estuary are in preparation and it is hoped that work will commence on these schemes this year. Surveys have also been undertaken of embankments in the Big Isle and the Castlewray and Thorn sections of the Swilly estuary, County Donegal. Survey and design work is proceeding on schemes for the Boyne in Counties Louth, Meath, Cavan, Westmeath, Offaly and Kildare; the Erne in Counties Cavan, Leitrim, Longford and Monaghan; the Suir in Counties Tipperary, Waterford, Kilkenny and Limerick; the Maigue in Counties Limerick and Tipperary; the Corrib-Mask in Counties Galway and Mayo, and the Quin in County Clare.
It is hoped to commence also this year engineering surveys of four more catchments, three majors, the Mulkear, the Boyle, the Owenmore (Sligo) and one minor, the Bonet. This would mean that 15 of the 28 catchments on the priority list of major catchments and eight of the catchments on the minor priority list will have been reached.
Progress is being made with the extension of the main arterial drainage programme to deal with what are called "intermediate rivers", small catchments with independent outfalls to the sea or larger lakes and which do not form part of listed catchments. One scheme on the Swilly downstream of Letterkenny is being carried out by direct labour and will probably be completed this year. A scheme for the Owvane, County Cork has been completed by contract. A contract has been placed for the Duff scheme in Counties Sligo and Leitrim. It is hoped to invite tenders shortly for a scheme for the Matt (or Ring) River, County Dublin, the Abbey River, County Donegal, and the Brickey River, County Waterford.
Schemes are being considered for the Lough Nahinch (or Carrigahorig), County Tipperary, the Assaly, County Wexford, the Glenamoy, County Mayo, the Knockcroghery or Ballyglass, County Roscommon, the Owenavoragh, County Wexford and the Creegh, County Clare. Engineering and valuation surveys of four more intermediate river catchments will be undertaken this year. A scheme of incentive bonus has been instituted in the Broadmeadow catchment and so far has proved mutually beneficial to the workers and the State. It is being closely watched and we are hoping that the results will justify attempts to extend it to other and bigger schemes.
I should mention that progress with arterial drainage has not been made easy by a continued shortage of engineering staff. Continued efforts are being made to recruit and I hope that in the coming year the position will be easier. I mentioned earlier the scheme for trainee architectural assistants. The Commissioners of Public Works hope to be able to inaugurate this summer a similar scheme for trainee engineering technicians and this would be a great help in relieving the engineers of the more routine work. A scheme for the training of apprentices to the fitting and turning trades was commenced in the Central Engineering Workshop, Inchicore, in September, 1962. Three apprentices were taken on. A similar number will be taken on each year.
Last year I drew attention to one particular item which although it did not appear in either Vote 8 or Vote 9 was, I considered, worthy of mention. This is the restoration of Kilmainham Jail. The building was handed over to a voluntary body which was set up with the object of having the building restored and in the comparatively short time which has elapsed since the handing over took place, great strides have been made towards the completion of the project. The work is being undertaken as a spare time activity by those engaged in it and a substantial part of it has already been completed. The trustees, the committee of management and the many voluntary workers are all giving their spare time, energy and talents generously to the tasks they have set themselves out to achieve and they deserve every possible credit and encouragement. I feel confident that all here will join with me in paying a well-deserved tribute to all those associated with the work in wishing them final success with their praiseworthy efforts.
Once again this year, I should like to assure Deputies that I am prepared to facilitate them at all times to the best of my ability and to furnish them with any information they may require regarding the services coming under the heading "Public Works".
I move:
"That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration."
This Estimate is an interesting comment on public administration, so far as the Government are concerned. Many fine things are being done by the Parliamentary Secretary's office, but many things are being done about which the people down the country and in Dublin say: "Do we need all this?"
I see that the revised estimated cost of "State Apartments—Rebuilding of burnt-out Drawing Rooms and former Bedroom Block" is £200,000. There is always provision for Árus an Uachtaráin in this Estimate. It is very low this year. It is down from tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands to ordinary thousands.
I am glad, and many people are glad, that a statue is being erected to Thomas Davis.
The estimate for "Revenue Commissioners, Dublin Castle—Rebuilding of Cross Block" is £115,000 and for "Stamping Branch—New Premises" the estimate is £525,000. Those are the kind of figures that set the people down the country thinking. From the amount of office blocks that need to be built, one would think we were ruling an empire and not a small country.
The estimate for "Dún Laoghaire Harbour:—Mail Boat Pier—Improvements" is £208,300, and the estimate for the car-ferry terminal is £300,000. I have not much to say about that because I realise that Dún Laoghaire is a great harbour and a great entry port. Down at Fishguard when the Great Western Railway wanted to set up a port for passenger traffic to and from Ireland, they set it up at their own expense practically. The State supplies the airports for aviation, but the railways supplied their own stations, waiting rooms, offices, and so on. The car ferry terminal will be of great benefit and it will also bring more traffic and be of benefit to the companies that use Dún Laoghaire.
I wonder if that would be the responsibility of the Parliamentary Secretary, or if it would be more relevant on the Estimate for the Department of Transport and Power?
Do not ask me to bring up anything on the Estimate for the Department of Transport and Power. At least the Parliamentary Secretary will try to do something.
If, however, he has no function, the Deputy will be wasting time.
Do the Office of Public Works not do the building?
On the instructions of the various Departments who sanction the works.
The estimate for the new Garda training centre at Templemore is £560,000. The total estimated expenditure to 31st March was £300,000, and there is provision for £175,000. Would I be out of order in asking what will be done with the depot if the Garda leave it? Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary will tell me when he is replying.
They will make it an outoffice of Árus an Uachtaráin.
As I said, we will always have Árus an Uachtaráin with us in this Estimate. It is about time houses were provided for married members of the Garda. It is desirable that if a Garda is transferred down the country, there will be a house for him to go into. I have a good idea how many houses the Parliamentary Secretary will be able to build with £250,000, but it will be money well spent.
In the matter of schools, I take it that it is the function of the Minister for Education to say that a school is required in a locality and the function of the Parliamentary Secretary to provide the plans and specifications and design. There is one matter which I have already mentioned on the Vote for Education and to which I should like to refer on this Vote. I was at the opening ceremony in respect of a new school in Dungarvan. A mural had been designed and executed for that school by one of Ireland's sculptors. It is a beautiful work of art, depicting the patron saint of the school. I would suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that advertisements should be published asking sculptors and artists to submit designs for a statue, mural or painting of the patron saint when schools are being erected. It would be a good thing if as far as schools are concerned, the State were the patron of the arts and were to give Irish sculptors and painters an opportunity of carrying out work for them.
There is provision in the Estimate for the renewal of stone work in respect of the National Library and National Museum. The National Library is to be removed to Haddington Road, to a new building. I thought there would be an estimate for it here. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to let me know what is the intention. I notice in the list of New Works, Alterations and Additions that the National Gallery extension is estimated to cost £315,000. The Parliamentary Secretary says that that is from the Exchequer. The National Gallery received nearly £500,000 recently from the Shaw Bequest. I do not know the terms of the Shaw Bequest. Perhaps that money must be used for the purchase of pictures. I would suggest that that amount of money is available, if it is not restricted to the purchase of pictures.
The Parliamentary Secretary did not say a great deal about the building he is carrying out for the Veterinary College, Ballsbridge, the extension to which is estimated to cost £100,000. In regard to Abbotstown Farm, work in respect of the experimental animals farmyard is estimated to cost £66,000 and the estimated cost of work to be carried out in relation to the foundation stock farmyard is £92,000.
I come now to fisheries and fishery harbours. It is not made clear to me what amount of money it is intended to spend on each of the fishery harbours. I have had other estimates in my hands at various times in which it was possible to show exactly what would be spent on each harbour. I had a famous one which showed in one year that £50,000 would be spent on Greencastle. I can always remember that because at the time hardly any fish was being caught at Greencastle, whereas hundreds of thousands of boxes of fish were being landed in Dunmore East, where no money was being spent. It is unfortunate, but perhaps it is the way the Parliamentary Secretary's office got it from the Department of Lands, that the fishery harbours are listed in the order Killybegs, Castletownbere, Howth, Galway and Dunmore East. The extraordinary thing is that more fish is landed at Dunmore East than at all the others together.
The Parliamentary Secretary said that the engineering investigations necessary for the development of the outline plans prepared by Mr. Bjuke, the Swedish consultant, are proceeding and that it is expected that construction work will be commenced at Killybegs, Castletownbere and Dunmore East in the current financial year. The Parliamentary Secretary told me some time ago that the estimate for Dunmore East was £275,000. I should like to know what is the estimate of the amount that will be spent at Dunmore East in the current year. The Parliamentary Secretary said:
A sum of £43,000 has been provided for improvement works in the fishery interests at small harbours around the coast. Work is in progress at Greencastle, County Donegal...
It is strange that Greencastle should be included as a small harbour, having regard to all the money that has been spent on it in the past four or five years. Clogherhead, County Louth, is also included. I would not consider it a small place. Ballyhack, County Wexford, is also included. That is a small place, even though it is in the estuary of the River Suir and in portion of the country that I am more concerned with than anywhere else.
The Parliamentary Secretary stated that it is hoped to start work during the year at Duncannon, County Wexford. I should like him to say the extent of the work to be carried out at Duncannon and how much will be carried out in the current year.
The statement by the Parliamentary Secretary that proposals for Kilmore Quay, County Wexford, are being investigated, shatters me because Kilmore Quay is situate opposite the largest fishing grounds off the coast of this country. Even though it could be said that the Parliamentary Secretary has no function, the sooner the Fisheries Branch tell the Parliamentary Secretary to "get cracking" on Kilmore Quay, the better.
The list of New Works, Alterations and Additions includes "Major Fisheries Harbours (Stage I)." The total estimated cost is £1,260,000. The total estimated expenditure to 31st March, 1963 is £17,000 and the provision for 1963-64 is £140,000. So £140,000 will be spent on major fishery harbours. The total estimated cost of the fisheries research station at Galway is £150,000. I hope the fisheries station to be erected in Galway will be a greater success than the fisheries plant that was erected there some four or five years ago.
That would not be a matter for the Parliamentary Secretary.
I shall make no further comment on that matter.
I am glad.
I must refer to the fact that £80,000 of the taxpayers' money was put into something that was never used.
The Deputy could say it relevantly on the Estimate for Fisheries.
I would have to mention this in relation to the fact that £150,000 is to be spent on a fisheries research station at Galway. I am wishing it luck and hoping it will be a greater success.
We have arterial drainage then : the Corrib-Clare in Counties Galway, Mayo and Roscommon; the Inny in Counties Cavan, Longford, Meath and Westmeath; the Maine in County Kerry; the Moy in Counties Mayo, Roscommon and Sligo; the Deel in Counties Limerick and Cork, and so on. We are told that the total cost of all schemes completed or in hands amounts to over £16 million, benefiting some 400 acres of land—a great many people question that this expenditure has benefited some 400 acres of land.
How many acres?
He forgot to add a few noughts.
400,000 acres of land. Survey and design work is proceeding on schemes for the Boyne in Counties Louth, Meath, Cavan, Westmeath, Offaly and Kildare—I notice that the Suir is here at last—and in Counties Tipperary, Waterford, Kilkenny and Limerick. Survey and design work has a habit of proceeding for years and years. When is it the intention of the Office of Public Works to appear on the Suir? When does the Parliamentary Secretary estimate that we will be able to welcome him to Waterford? Will we live long enough to see him on the banks of the Suir endeavouring to reclaim some of the best land in the country?
He came as far as Youghal Bridge and he was very welcome.
And he made a very important statement there that a great many people missed. I commend him for that. I am glad to see the Suir mentioned here at last. The Suir rises in the Golden Vale and a Limerick man knows something about the Golden Vale just as well as a Waterford man. This is land worth draining.
Nearly as good as the land in Meath.
I would not defer to the Deputy in that because I know the value of it. I should like to commend the Office of Public Works for the work they have done at Jerpoint Abbey. It is a magnificent job. I suggest the Parliamentary Secretary should cast his eyes towards Dunbrody. There are some cracks appearing and some pointing needs to be done. I would also ask the Parliamentary Secretary to do something about the old city walls at the top of Castle Street. The great French Tower stands there. It would be a splendid thing if we could get into the French Tower again because there is a magnificent view from it of the city, the river and the estuary down to the island.
A great deal of money is being spent here that could be held until we meet better times. I do not think money should be spent on something which will yield no return. Admittedly, that has to be done in some cases, but it should be avoided as far as possible. I like to see public money being spent on something worthwhile, reclaiming land or creating something of use. I approve of land reclamation, the construction of river banks to prevent the flooding of good land, the construction of harbours where the people fish, the construction of schools where there are children to attend them. All these things are good. For some years here, it was a matter of the most powerful pressure group. Public works were done in areas in which they were not of much value, to say the least of it. It was a waste of public money. The pressure would be put on and the Minister would give directions to the Office of Public Works to do a certain job, and the job was done. The Parliamentary Secretary should avoid that. In his first year here, I commended him on his courage in coming down and reclaiming some good land in Limerick. That is commendable, but it is not commendable to spend money on useless works. If these works are purely for the purpose of providing employment, then they should be called employment schemes.
What the Deputy says is not the case. Would he give me an example of money being spent uselessly?
Some of the £16 million here might bear investigation.
That is for arterial drainage.
Some of it could bear investigation.
I thought the Deputy referred to State works and State building.
The reclamation of land is worthwhile. Building is useful if it supplies a need. It is a good thing for the State to build schools if the schools are used, a factory if it is to be used, a fish installation if it is to be used. This is something for which I cannot blame the Parliamentary Secretary and his Department but we have seen these things built all over the country and they are no use. We should take advantage of the experience we have had and be more careful in the future.
I would again raise this matter of the enormous sums of money we are spending in putting up accommodation for shipping companies in Dún Laoghaire. We are spending £500,000 to provide accommodation for the berthing of ships and these companies pay only the dock dues, which is not a proposition at all. The companies which use these facilities should have to contribute something towards their cost.
It does not arise on the Estimate.
It remains for me to hope that when the Parliamentary Secretary goes back to his office, he will hurry up this matter of the Suir drainage.
I must disagree with the previous speaker on one point, that is, in relation to the money being spent on arterial drainage. As anybody who lives or was reared in the country knows, it is one of the ways of spending Government money which is giving very good results.
I did not say I objected to money being spent on arterial drainage. I said I objected to money being spent on draining land which was useless. We should be selective about it.
Even that qualification by Deputy Lynch does not absolve him because land is useless until it is reclaimed. What some people who live in cities and towns would call the most useless land turned out to be very useful land when it was reclaimed and properly treated. If you want a typical example you can see what is happening at the present time in the lowlands and in many other places. There are many places where land which was waterlogged and useless ten years ago is now giving very fine crops.
My quarrel with the Parliamentary Secretary on the matter of arterial drainage arises for a different reason. When the arterial drainage schemes were being selected first, maybe the people who were making the selection did it on a certain basis but it does not appear to me anyway to be the correct basis. Some very important rivers were left pretty low on the list and a number of less important ones were done. I believe that all of them should be done but a number of the less important ones were done first and only now we are getting to some of the major schemes.
The planning of a scheme takes an extraordinarily long time. I agree there is a lot of technical work to be done but to the layman a matter of four, five or six years seems an extremely long time to spend on planning such schemes. I refer particularly to the Boyne. For a considerable time the Boyne appeared to be losing its place and I hope this time the Board of Works will keep to the date and that the job will be started within the time laid down by the Board of Works and the Parliamentary Secretary in answer to a query of mine some time ago.
There is one aspect of arterial drainage which is overlooked until the cost comes up at local authority level and that is the question of the maintenance of the rivers that have been drained. The State pays an enormous amount of money to have the rivers drained and then the local authorities must assume responsibility for maintenance by the Board of Works engineers and Board of Works workmen at a certain level. I do not think it is generally realised the impact which the maintenance of some of these rivers can have on local authority rates and it is not a question of trying to make a bargain as to what it might cost. It is a demand that must be met. I would seriously suggest that the Department should look into the question of providing a subsidy towards the cost of maintenance when the River Boyne is done.
Thousands of people have been looking forward for many years to the arterial drainage of the Boyne. Even before I was born people were talking about it and the good it would do. However, there will be a tremendous amount of money required to maintain the Boyne and its tributaries when it is drained. It is the first example of a really big river running through one local authority area. While it does touch certain other areas, I believe County Meath will have to carry the main burden of the maintenance of the Boyne. Therefore, the Department should seriously consider, before its drainage is completed, some type of grant for the purpose of easing the burden on the local rates.
Everyone in the country has contributed towards the capital cost. One hundred per cent is paid by every citizen in the State.
I am as well aware of that as the Parliamentary Secretary but I am sure he will agree that taxes have been laid down at national level and everybody contributes but if those taxes had to be paid only by the people who will benefit by them then the taxes would be unbearable for those people. I am suggesting that is the situation we shall arrive at in County Meath when the Boyne is drained.
There is also the question of the minor and intermediate schemes. The intermediate schemes, I understand, are not between the minor and the major schemes but on a lower grade than the minor schemes. I do not know who thought up the word "intermediate" or how it came in but I have noticed that when intermediate schemes are being selected there is no fixed basis of selection.
There is.
I suggest that the county with the strongest vote gets the intermediate scheme. That is the one thing I would complain about as far as the Office is concerned. If the Parliamentary Secretary wishes, I could give him a number of instances where that actually happens. This is one of the things which is not done correctly. The selection of the other schemes has been for quite some time very fair but the selection in regard to the intermediate schemes is a bit of a racket. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to take a little more interest in the type of schemes to be selected and if there is a basis other than the one I have suggested, perhaps the general public could be told.
I shall tell the Deputy.
I asked the Parliamentary Secretary a question in this House and he said there was no set way of selecting the schemes.
The Deputy knows about the conditions in regard to independent outfall. If the Deputy looks through the list, he will see the situation. As far as possible, I am trying to see that, if we are doing a scheme a year, all other things being equal, one will go to each of the four provinces.
By no stretch of the imagination could two be started in the one constituency?
This is a very serious matter. Deputy Tully seems to think it is one for political consideration and said he noticed that these have been given where the Government Party is strongest.
That is correct.
That is not logical. If we were to use that method, they should be given where the Government Party are weakest. That is what I would do if I had my way but I have not. All things being equal, we try as far as possible to give each province an intermediate river.
It does not appear to have worked out that way so far but if the Parliamentary Secretary says that is how it will work in future, it might be much better.
The Parliamentary Secretary was not here when the former Deputy Killilea and Deputy Donnellan gave away some secrets.
That was before my time.
I know that.
There is another river in which I am particularly interested and which is known as Nanny Water. It flows through portion of County Meath. A number of schemes were carried out within striking distance of that but apparently it was not considered. I got the impression—I am glad the Parliamentary Secretary proposes to remove it—that there were considerations other than the amount of land that would benefit if a scheme were carried out.
On the subject of arterial drainage I want to compliment the Parliamentary Secretary for something he did immediately he took office. He agreed with the trade unions concerned that the workers' wages were too low and he increased them by 10/- a week. When representations were made later he again increased them by a further 10/- per week. The rate is still low but at least he did something his predecessors had not even considered. He had the wage rates increased by 1-6th within about six months of taking office and I pay him tribute for that.
A matter about which I cannot throw any bouquets is the question of the hours worked by men employed on arterial drainage, 48 hours a week and all the overtime in summer that they are prepared to work. I fear the reply I got some time ago about the question of overtime rather let the cat out of the bag. This particular job is being done on a 48-hour week basis, I believe, because it is claimed by the Office of the Parliamentary Secretary that it is required to have a considerable amount of overtime work in the summer in order to get the job done. I suggest that the objection to having a further three hours at overtime rates, which would be the position if the hours were reduced, as they should be, to 45, is partly the cause of the trouble. In addition, all the local authorities' employees — I wish the Minister for Local Government were present— except in County Donegal are at present working a five-day, 45-hour week while the employees of the Board of Works on arterial drainage, doing the same type of work, are still working 48-hours for a 5½-day week.
Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary's hands are tied in this. I understand it is a Government decision but I ask him, if he can do anything about it, to settle the question once and for all. They are the same type of men as are employed in other jobs. It is all very fine to say that the Department must get the work done and that it must be completed and that they must be kept working 48-hours per week and particularly that it would cost too much to reduce the hours. I am sure the Parliamentary Secretary would be the last to suggest that there are two races of people in this country, those in the upper set and the workers. Very many people think that. We have those in the upper bracket of workers and many other categories working 38, 35 or even 30 hours a week and getting more money for it. They may be technical men or people who have spent a long time acquiring the knowledge they have but they get much more money than the people actually doing the heavy work who are still kept on a 48-hour week. If the Parliamentary Secretary could do something about this, as he did last year when he was appealed to here, it would be very good for everybody concerned. I ask him to be as quick about the 48-hour week as he was then. It is a very sore point among people employed in arterial drainage who feel they should be treated the same as everybody else.
There was a time when those working on arterial drainage liked a lot of overtime because they were getting such shockingly bad wages that they had to supplement them somehow. If the Parliamentary Secretary intervenes, as he did last year when they got an extra £1 a week on the £6 they were earning up to then, the matter could be settled very quickly, that is, if he throws his not inconsiderable weight into the balance.
I have referred to the bonus being paid at Broadmeadow. I am glad the bonus is introduced because its operation has the full co-operation of the trade unions and workers in very many jobs including State employment and it gives extra wages without a lot of extra effort, to the workers concerned, and the employers, the State in this case, are getting a good return. I ask that it should be applied to other jobs because again it becomes a bone of contention if one rate of wages is paid in one job and workers doing the same type of work in another job get a lesser rate. I am sure the Parliamentary Secretary appreciates that.
We hope to extend it.
I know that but I hope it will not be too long as otherwise all the rivers will be finished.
The Deputy does not believe that surely?
I can say it now. Finally, the five-day week, in fact, operates where you have building trade operatives, among these dealing with Deputy Lynch's national or ancient monuments. They are nearly all on a five-day week and I think it is a question of differentiating between two types of works. I think it is wrong; once the principle has been established there should be no question of making excuses—they are not reasons—for not applying it to everybody to whom it can apply.
The Board of Works are doing a good job in regard to monuments but a number of them do not seem to be looked after at all. Some may not have been brought to the notice of the Board. I have in mind one that was recently damaged perhaps by the sea or by vandals. It is known as the Tower at Mornington, County Meath, quite an old building and quite a well-known landmark, for which apparently nobody is responsible. You can go upstairs inside and get a good view from the top. I think the Board of Works should do something about it.
Has it any national importance?
It is probably a folly.
Yes. There is another at Kells which is called the Spire of Lloyd but is actually a folly built by somebody in the Famine period. It is a well-known landmark for 30 miles around. It has a glass dome and until ten or 15 years ago it was possible for people to go up inside and get quite a good view of the surrounding district. It is now dangerous and if something is not done about it will fall down. Again, it seems to be nobody's responsibility but I think that the Board of Works should look after it.
A number of new Garda barracks are being built at present. The only snag about it is that we seem to be pretty slow doing it. Planning is one thing and carrying out the work is an entirely different matter. Even where Gardaí are housed in fine old buildings, at present the tendency is to abandon them and build new barracks. While in many cases the new ones are modern, they are not anything like the buildings left behind. Every effort should be made to ensure that the buildings vacated are not left as eyesores. They should either be repaired and disposed of or knocked down altogether. They should not be left as an eyesore in the middle of a village.
That will not happen.
One of the things I cannot understand is why very old schools in bad condition, which cannot be replaced for a number of years, cannot be given as many modern conveniences as possible. It seems a bit ridiculous that a school which will not be replaced for six or seven years, because it is at the bottom of the list, but which could be modernised for the expenditure of less than £1,000, cannot have water, for instance.
Would the decision rest with the Parliamentary Secretary or some other body?
It rests with the Parliamentary Secretary in that particular case. The choice rests with the Minister for Education, but what is to be done rests with the Parliamentary Secretary.
When he receives instructions from the Minister for Education.
The Parliamentary Secretary could get a considerable amount of work done on the old schools at very little cost.
This Vote covers such a wide field that we could debate it for hours. I will conclude by asking that Deputy Lynch's reference to excess expenditure be borne in mind. We have had too much, particularly in regard to Árus an Uachtaráin. In my time here previously and now—I am not blaming this Government alone—there has been a fetish that no matter what happens, a large sum must be spent on Árus an Uachtaráin every year. It has had at least its share. While it must be kept in the very best condition, money could be spent much better than trying to repair and further repair a building which is adequate for the needs of the people who use it.
Ba mhaith liom cupla focal a rá ar an Meastachán seo. It is interesting to hear some people say we should more or less back-pedal on these Estimates until we have better times and more money to spend. That would be a retrograde step and one, I am sure, the Parliamentary Secretary would not be anxious to take. It is well known he is a man of energy, who likes to get things done. It is necessary to have money in order to carry out this programme for the wellbeing of the nation.
We learned at school that Ireland was more or less like a saucer and that drainage, therefore, was a big problem. It has remained so during the period of alien government. Native government tried to remedy much of that evil. In order to carry out drainage, money is needed because there must be proper surveys——
And engineers.
Yes, engineers are important, too. Without engineers, we would not be able to go ahead with schemes such as these. Many so-called engineers will tell you, sitting around their own firesides, how a whole area can be drained by removing two or three obstacles. Those trained in surveying difficult terrain know that a good knowledge of engineering problems is necessary. Therefore, it is necessary to have qualified engineers. It is necessary to pay them an adequate salary, or they may leave and go elsewhere where there is a higher scale.
My own constituency is in the north of the country and is drained by three major rivers. I have always felt that the portion of the Shannon from its source in the Quilty Mountains to Lough Allen, which is a very large lake, could be considered an intermediate scheme. The Erne flows into the Six Counties. In recent years, the various obstacles there have been removed, and once the surveys are completed, it will be possible to proceed with the smaller rivers which empty into the Erne catchment on the Six Counties side of the Border.
I want to thank the Parliamentary Secretary for agreeing to receive a deputation from my area in connection with the Erne drainage, and particularly the drainage of the Woodford canal.
We do not get any harbour grants or indeed any elaborate drainage grants in my constituency. Very little drainage has been carried out. We are adjacent to the Border and until recently, for reasons into which I shall not go, it was not possible to go ahead and clean a river or canal which emptied into the Six Counties.
The Boyne drains part of the constituency of Cavan. As the last speaker said, the work there is necessary, too, and I should not like to see it cut down but actually pushed ahead.
It is true that in recent years the Board of Works have been doing excellent work in regard to primary schools. I was glad to hear they have produced a new design which will eliminate the necessity for having corridors in two, three, or four-roomed schools. These corridors were very draughty and were often the cause of many accidents. Apart from that, they were rather insanitary.
The matter of the design of national schools is of the highest importance and one to which the best brains and the best engineering skills in the country should be devoted so that eventually we will evolve a design which will be not only useful but attractive and artistic as well. It is vital that our design of national schools should ensure the provision of the necessary accommodation for the people of tender age who attend them. Equally important is the sanctioning of sites which will provide for national schools adequate playing space—at least a few acres per school. There is no reason, either, why care should not be taken to provide excellent facilities indoors —adequate picture rails, low window sashes, built-in cupboards and facilities for the showing of slides and films of historical and geographical interest when such films become available.
The Parliamentary Secretary, as I have already stated, has done a very good job in the matter of bringing to public attention the need for preserving, and renovating in certain instances, many of our national monuments. In the past, our people were too intensely engaged in the terrific fight for survival as a nation to pay the necessary attention to our national monuments, to the relics of our past and culture when we were known as the Island of Saints and Scholars, when we sent our people abroad to convert and to teach the peoples of many lands. Because of the invaders, many of our monuments were destroyed, mutilated or neglected, and I am glad now to notice that an effort is being made, as far as our resources can permit, to try to restore and preserve what remains of our national monuments. In my constituency we have, in the area of Breffni, Loch Uachtar Castle, where Eoin Roe died. This is a unique circular castle of native origin and certainly should be regarded as a very important monument. We have tried to get this monument included in the list and I hope this can be done even now.
At a recent exhibition, photographs of these monuments were on display and I submit it would be an excellent idea if a film could be made of that exhibition with a view to having it shown on television and in the schools later on. I would suggest also that a booklet be published giving details of the exhibition and photographic studies of the monuments, for circulation in national and secondary schools. It would cultivate an interest in them among the ordinary people and the youth of the nation.
At the rate the Deputy's Government are going, the whole country will be one national monument, one ruin, before long.
That may be the opinion of the Deputy but it is certainly not the opinion of most of the people of the country and he should be well aware of that, in view of the fact that he represents 50 per cent of his two man Party. That is what the people of the country think of him and his views. I can safely say that the Parliamentary Secretary has done excellent work. Due to the efforts of this Government, many school-building and drainage projects have been completed which would still be at the paper stage, lying in pigeon holes, if left to the Coalition Government. The work for which the Parliamentary Secretary has been responsible has provided employment and, as well, has been responsible for better services not alone in providing more and better land for tillage but also in the provision of more and better schools and public buildings. I never regard money spent on schools or education as being wasted. By virtue of the fact that about 80 per cent of the children who attend our national schools may not get any further school education, it is highly necessary that these primary schools be the best we can provide.
Why will 80 per cent of them not get further education?
It is important that money be spent on these schools. I again congratulate the Parliamentary Secretary on the manner in which he is tackling these two problems of the provision of schools and the drainage programme. I shall have more to say on the following Vote. I am content now to congratulate the Parliamentary Secretary on the excellence of his work since he assumed office.
It is very encouraging to hear Deputy Dolan from Cavan talking about preserving old monuments and blaming the invader for doing the destruction he spoke about. He implied that the invader did not give a chance to the native Government, of which he is proud to be a member, to do as much as they would like in that respect. The Deputy should bear in mind that the invader he is referring to was no more dangerous than the modern invader whom the Government are encouraging by permitting the purchase of the best land——
Surely this does not arise on this Vote?
I entirely agree. I was just answering Deputy Dolan who rambled on with this nonsense. It is an extraordinary situation that the people of Cavan do not realise the type of nonsense that is being spouted in this House by some of their representatives. I should like to see Deputy Dolan's speech published in his area so that the people there will understand the mentality of a man who advocates the building of better national schools because 80 per cent of the children who attend them will never have a chance of going any further in the realm of education. That sentence in itself should be sufficient to condemn any Deputy.
On the important issue of arterial drainage, I feel sure every Deputy who speaks here will agree it is highly desirable to spend the maximum amount possible on proper drainage. However, I think it is very foolish for a Government to sound the drums and suggest they are doing wonderful work in that field by putting into an Estimate of this kind certain figures for drainage which will not be achieved in the year in respect of which the Estimate is provided. It is all very fine for the Parliamentary Secretary and the Government to say: "We are going to spend huge sums of money in the coming year on drainage; we have allocated the money", while at the same time they cannot spend the money because they have not got the engineers. That is why I queried Deputy Dolan on the necessity for having engineers and he agreed with me.
The situation now arises that the Board of Works are not able to recruit the engineering staff necessary to carry out survey work on many important arterial catchment areas. This shortage of engineers did not arise today or yesterday. This shortage of engineers must have been apparent to the Board of Works for the past five or six years. I presume that a State Department which is charged with the responsibility of carrying out major drainage works, plans for ten, 15 or 20 years ahead and that in the projected planning provisional arrangements are made for the recruiting of sufficient engineers. If such provision has not been made in the past five years to carry out this drainage work, if the necessary long term planning has not been made in regard to securing engineering staff, somebody is at fault.
I want to make it quite clear that I am not blaming the present holder of the office of Parliamentary Secretary. I am not blaming him personally at all. I believe he has a great interest in this problem of drainage and is most anxious to go ahead, but I wonder what influence he has with his Government? I wonder is he able to influence the Minister for Finance to get the necessary money to attract qualified engineers to Ireland and take up the appointments available? If there had been an overall plan in the minds of the people responsible for drainage, they would have been able to see, four years ago, the figures of admissions to the universities. They would have been able to find out from the three constituent colleges of the National University, and from Trinity College, how many students were going in for civil engineering each year. They could also have queried the students when they qualified, or in their final year, as to whether or not they were interested in taking up appointments in this country. That is the situation in big business outside this country and to some extent the need for a special advisory committee, to query final year students about whether they are prepared to take up appointments in various business concerns, is beginning to manifest itself.
Did the Board of Works at any time in the past four or five years ask final engineering students about the possibility of their taking up appointments on drainage work in this country? The position now is that very few students are taking up civil engineering in the universities. The emphasis is on mechanical and electrical engineering. Where is the Parliamentary Secretary or the Government going to get the quota of engineers to carry out the essential drainage work? I understand that advertisements seeking engineers have been put in the newspapers on a number of occasions during the past six months and that the response has been very disappointing. Indeed, not alone are the Board of Works unable to get engineers but in many instances local authorities are now feeling the pinch in regard to recruiting engineers.
If the Government are serious about getting arterial drainage under way without delay, there is only one course open to them, that is, a crash programme as far as engineers are concerned. Surrender, if you like; get the Department of Finance to open the dam as far as the restriction on finance is concerned; pay the engineers and they will come back here. The Parliamentary Secretary knows that the Government had to pay veterinary surgeons to come here from Australia and other countries in order to clear the cattle of Ireland of tuberculosis. There was no end to the amount of money made available for that crash programme. It was considered an essential duty to recruit veterinary surgeons and pay them well.
Is drainage not a vital matter in rural Ireland? Is it not of vital interest to the community? If it is, I think it is only fair to suggest seriously to the Parliamentary Secretary that he should approach the Government again and emphasise the necessity for offering attractive scales of remuneration to Irish engineers abroad, Irish graduates, who will come back and put their skill at the disposal of the nation. We are not going to get them for marbles. I am afraid if this situation is allowed to continue, we will have the Parliamentary Secretary—or at least some Parliamentary Secretary—coming here next year and once again telling us: "We cannot get the engineers."
Now, the biggest arterial drainage catchment area is the Shannon. Since I came into this House in 1948, I have been speaking about it until I am sick and tired. We have now come to the stage where, having surveyed the Shannon from its mouth to its source in Deputy Dolan's constituency, and having got advice from American experts, the decision now is to go ahead and carry out a final survey in connection with certain drainage works. But what is the position? Having reached this stage and having made a decision, we find there are no engineers to carry it out. The Parliamentary Secretary had the audacity within the past month to tell me it would require a team of 30 engineers working for six years to carry out the survey but even while he was answering the question, he had to admit that he was finding great difficulty in recruiting sufficient staff to carry out survey work on other schemes which were already under way. Where are we to get the engineers to carry out the essential survey work on the arterial catchment areas which are awaiting attention if it is not possible, except with the greatest difficulty, to keep a survey staff on the existing arterial drainage schemes which are under way?
I do not want to repeat myself ad nauseam on this. I want to make it quite clear that unless the Government are prepared to pay their engineers, to have a proper recruiting programme offering attractive salaries, we will be coming into this House for years without any sign of drainage work being done.
The Parliamentary Secretary must bear in mind that he made a pronouncement here some time ago concerning the county of Roscommon. He must have been in a very generous mood. The announcement he made in regard to a drainage scheme for Roscommon was given tremendous publicity in the county. Banner headlines appeared in all the local papers. I myself was responsible for proposing a vote of thanks to the Parliamentary Secretary at a council meeting for the courage he had shown in making a decision on this very knotty and difficult drainage problem. Other Parliamentary Secretaries in the past had sidetracked it, presumably on advice given to them by technical experts.
The present Parliamentary Secretary was prepared to say he would go ahead with a major scheme in the Boyle catchment area in Roscommon. We have taken note of it here in the Parliamentary Secretary's speech. I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to tell me if he is satisfied that that scheme will be commenced this year-in other words, that he has the survey team available in this year to get ahead with that survey work of the Boyle catchment area. On that particular issue of my constituency, I should also like the Parliamentary Secretary to let me know when the drainage work in Knockcroghery area, the Ballyglass river, will be commenced.
I should not like to let this opportunity pass without commenting on the statement by the Parliamentary Secretary today that progress is being made with the extension of the main arterial drainage programme to deal with what are called intermediate rivers—small catchments with independent outfalls to the sea or larger lakes and which do not form part of listed catchments. I maintained several years ago in this House that the intermediate drainage scheme which was introduced by the Government would be of no benefit whatever to inland counties because the intention of the Department concerned with drainage was to deal with rivers which flow direct to the sea. Deputies will recall that at the time the drums were beaten and this new intermediate drainage scheme was announced the Government announced it on the basis of its being a substitute for and doing a better job than the Local Authorities (Works) Act. We had a great discussion in this House on it. At that stage, the Local Authorities (Works) Act had gone by the board and Deputy J. Brennan, the then Parliamentary Secretary, announced in this House that the Local Authorities (Works) Act was of no use —naturally enough, according to Fianna Fáil.
Here, we have a new intermediate drainage scheme which will take the place of the Local Authorities (Works) Act. What do we find now, although that happened over five years ago? We find that two of the intermediate rivers are listed for the county of Donegal, from which the then Parliamentary Secretary, Deputy J. Brennan, comes. In the sense in which the scheme was announced, our progress so far is that one scheme on the Swilly is being carried out; one scheme in County Cork has been completed; a contract has been placed for the Duff River in Sligo; it is hoped to place tenders in respect of a river in County Dublin, another in County Donegal and another in County Waterford. That is as far as we have gone since the scheme came in. Why? To what is the delay due? Was there a shortage of engineers there, too?
I shall accept that this Government are serious about drainage if I see them prepared to recruit engineers. They cannot carry out their commitments at present due to a shortage of engineers. It is no good trying to tell the public they are prepared to spend money on drainage if they are not prepared to recruit the engineering staff. There is no use in telling this House that the Government are putting advertisements in the papers; that they are appealing to engineers; that the engineers will not come and that therefore the Government are not to blame. That answer will not be accepted by the farming community. Only one answer will be accepted and it is to get the engineers and you will get them if you pay them. The salaries offered are not attractive, without question or doubt. The engineers will not be enticed or encouraged, in so far as these salaries are concerned, to take up the appointments which are advertised. Consequently, the Government have no way out of it except to offer them more attractive rates.
I do not like to have to repeat matters about my own constituency but I must say we are getting very tired of promises so far as drainage is concerned. No county in Ireland has suffered as badly from flooding in the past 30 years as Roscommon and that is due to its geographical position. It is bounded on one side by the Shannon. I need not tell any Deputy what destruction the Shannon can do. On the other side, the county, for half its length, is bounded by the River Suck. When both these rivers are in flood it is an exaggeration, perhaps, to say they almost meet half way in the county but at times that is the impression created by the huge floods that are to be seen there at certain times of the year.
There is no use in putting forward the case that priority must be given to the best land in Ireland for drainage. That is not an argument that must be accepted. I have heard it made by Deputies. I have heard Deputies say: "Oh, that is great land. That is like land in County Meath. Priority should be given there." Let me put it clearly. Adjoining the Rivers Shannon and Suck and other tributaries of the Shannon, there are a great number of small farmers. They have not, perhaps, the best land but they are working that land to its utmost because, as small farmers, they have to work it to try to eke out an existence. Are we to give priority to the areas where the land is rich and where very few people are living or are we to give priority to the localities with the greatest number of holdings and where the greatest number of families are affected? Which are we most interested in? Does the best return come from the expenditure of money on fertile acres used for ranching purposes in most instances, or on the drainage of land carrying a huge population and where there are young families who are, in my opinion, the real wealth of the country?
I think some Deputies would say priority should be given where the land itself is most fertile rather than where the greatest number of people are affected. That is the type of mentality that worships pounds, shillings and pence, and that is the type of mentality that has more regard for the £ than for the human being. It is a mentality that has been apparent in this country for many years and it is time it was stamped out but I do not know if that is possible. It is not the fault of the people in Roscommon, Leitrim, Sligo, Mayo or Galway, that the land they live on is not the most fertile land in Ireland, and that is no justification for putting them back down on the drainage list.
Primary schools were mentioned. Would the Parliamentary Secretary comment further on the progress made in investigating the use of new types of building materials for schools and public buildings? He referred to the planning lay-out of primary schools, but I do not think he referred to any investigation which was carried out into new building techniques and the use of new materials for school-building. I gathered last year that he would have some announcement to make on that matter.
I know that criticism for the backlog of schools which need to be replaced cannot be laid at the door of the Parliamentary Secretary, but I am sure he knows that while the rate of progress has been commendable in existing circumstances, it is not sufficient to catch up on the backlog. Really it is little more than marking time in the overall position.
If it is possible to build double the number of schools being built at present, at 75 per cent of the cost, or even less and put up as good buildings, why should some such scheme not be undertaken? I know of one instance where there was an estimate of £5,000 per classroom for a 12-classroom school. That is a total of £60,000, to build a school with normal building materials. It was built with the new type of materials—new to this country—and it was put up in one-third the time it would have taken with normal construction methods. That school was built—and it has a beautiful recreation hall in addition to the usual facilities and amenities—at a total cost of less than £36,000.
Where was that?
Tullamore.
What about durability?
There was no question about durability. It is a secondary school and, as Deputies know, there are no grants available from Government sources. I can assure the Parliamentary Secretary that is only one school——
What was the system?
Prestressed concrete.
From where?
It is made in Ireland. The Parliamentary Secretary knows the firm in the Midlands which makes it. I will not give it free advertising here by mentioning the name. If he likes, I will tell the Parliamentary Secretary outside the House the name of the firm which produces prestressed concrete slabs of varying dimensions.
I know the firm. It is a commendable firm. I can tell the Deputy that I had a great interest in it as it is an Irish firm. We made an examination of the costs and they priced some works for us. The Deputy should not get the idea that the prices were all that attractive. I will leave it at that, but if the Deputy presses me, I will give further details.
I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to do so when he is replying. I cannot speak as a technician.
I was most anxious to use this firm because it is an Irish firm, but there was a question of economics.
I wonder is the Parliamentary Secretary taking into account the fact that a structure which would take 12 months to erect could be built in a period of six to eight or nine weeks? That is one point I want to bring to the notice of the Parliamentary Secretary.
That point is wrong.
May I put it this way? If the Parliamentary Secretary is not satisfied that the cost would be as reasonable as I suggest, one reason why it might appear higher to him at the moment is that there is no demand worth talking about. If there were a big programme, the prestressed concrete units could be provided on a very efficient and economic basis. The more buildings there were, the lower the costs would go in proportion. Is that not correct?
That is quite true.
If there were an acceptance of the idea of building with the new materials, the costs would go down considerably. That means making a decision to go ahead. I gather from some people with whom I discussed it that there is a prejudice against it in certain quarters. There is a prejudice against it on the part of a number of architects and engineers, and people who think that schools of the old type that would stop a tank should be built. I do not include the Parliamentary Secretary. There are interested people who have frowned on the idea of embarking on school-building with this new type material. They have a conservative outlook. Is it not sufficient to get 40 to 50 years out of a school? Is that not long enough to get out of a school?
One of the troubles has been that there was no proper maintenance of the schools. I have looked at a school which was built in 1899 and I would swear that there was not the slightest bit of maintenance carried out since 1900. I will not start any recriminations as to who is responsible. One improvement that has taken place in recent years is that when a school is built, it is mandatory that it must be kept in good condition. That is part of the regulations. Someone is made responsible for keeping the school in a proper state of repair.
Under the new system to which I have referred, the capital cost could be reduced considerably and, in addition, the school would be kept in a first-class state of repair at a very reasonable cost. The scheme has two attractions, in my opinion. One is that it would produce the goods in one-fifth of the time taken at present, and the second is that the capital cost involved, at a maximum, would be two-thirds of the existing cost. I say two-thirds but I believe the cost could be still further reduced if a bigger programme were properly thought out and embarked upon. This type of building has been carried out in the Six Counties, in England and in European countries for a number of years. There is no reason why the dead conservative hand should lie on this section of our community. The Board of Works have always been regarded as a conservative body. I am not being critical of them as individuals but I am critical of them as a Government body.
If the Parliamentary Secretary is prepared to take his courage in his hands and make a decision in respect of this new building technique he will be responsible for the biggest breakthrough in respect of the educational system that this country has experienced since the freedom this nation has today was achieved. If any member of the Government is likely to do it, the present holder of the office of Parliamentary Secretary is the most likely, in my opinion. For all that it is worth to him, I shall give him all the encouragement that I can. I would even go so far as to say to him that not alone have a number of secondary schools been built according to this technique but I know that churches are now being built in this way. The Parliamentary Secretary knows as well as I do that the persons who are responsible for the construction of churches do not buy a bad article at any time. Whether the article is for consumption or for use in any shape or form, they are sound experts. They are satisfied in respect of a number of churches to use the technique to which I have referred. All that is necessary is a reorganisation of the groups involved so that the technique which is available may be utilised to the maximum extent.
I should like to preface my few remarks by saying that this is the first opportunity I have had of speaking on a Vote for the Office of Public Works since the Parliamentary Secretary took up this position. I, like all other members of the House, have been very pleased and gratified by the evidence of the wind of change blowing through the once cobwebbed corridors of 51 St. Stephen's Green since the Parliamentary Secretary accepted this task. It is no mean task. Anybody coming into the legacy represented by the Office of Public Works had to have missionary zeal in order to achieve results. It is certainly my opinion and the opinion of most members of this House, as expressed amongst themselves, without reference to Party politics, that the Parliamentary Secretary has succeeded in creating a new look in the Office of Public Works and has achieved very remarkable success in a comparatively short space of time.
I was not at all in agreement with the views expressed by Deputy Lynch of Waterford, who complained about the amount of expenditure which is provided for in the Estimate. Of course, Deputy Lynch, in expressing the view that he did, was representing the traditional attitude of mind of the Party to which he belongs, which contends that retrenchment is more important than the provision of employment or than the benefits which flow from the expenditure of money, even expenditure which at times may be said to be of a risky nature. The vital difference between me and Deputy Lynch is that I think the expenditure by the Office of Public Works as provided for in the Estimate is fully justified in every respect and I do not see any evidence in the figures we have been given of any wasteful effort.
Reference was made to the expenditure at Dublin Castle. I have the opportunity of seeing what is being done there practically every week on my way to performing my constituency duties in Dublin Corporation. I must compliment the designers of the building there on the excellent way in which they have maintained the amenities in planning the addition to the offices. It will be a big advantage to the administration of the Revenue Commissioners and will add artistically to the area generally. I do not think any fault can be found on that score. The money being spent there is in my view being well spent.
I am very glad that the Parliamentary Secretary has indicated that he hopes to invite tenders shortly for a scheme of drainage of the Matt River, outside Balbriggan. This river has been a source of great local discontent and complaint for very many years. I and the other members who represent the area have made many efforts in other years to get something done. This is the first constructive, relatively large-scale effort being made to solve a very difficult engineering problem. This district represents a natural bowl which constitutes a very grave problem in the matter of drainage. The problem is now being tackled and we hope the work to be carried out will put an end to the flooding which has occurred in the district for many years, causing great loss to the small farmers in the district.
On the question of schools, it will be recalled that last year there was a good deal of publicity given to the fact that the old school in Portmarnock, County Dublin, was completely unfit for use. I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to indicate the stage reached in the proposals for the provision of a new school.
If I were to complain at all on the question of expenditure, I would make one, sole contribution. It is in the matter of the need for the provision of amplification in the Dáil Chamber. I have been here a few years and it has not seemed to me that, if the members of the House exercise their vocal chords with just a little more effort and energy, there would be any need for any amplification at all.
Particularly Ministers. They are the worst offenders.
It is not confined to Ministers. The more histrionic members seek to find the whisper limits of the acoustics here and those who are natural actors cannot refrain from a screaming tenor at all times. If these things could be regulated by the Chair, this problem of acoustics would not arise. I remember the advice I got some 25 years ago when I was first going out to get up on a ditch outside the chapel gates in County Dublin; I got advice on how to address a meeting and the technique to use from an old practitioner who said: "It is very simple—stand up, speak up and shut up". That could be practised to good effect here.
I should like to refer now to St. Stephen's Green, beloved by the citizens of Dublin. It is an historic public park and I am glad the Parliamentary Secretary has reviewed the outmoded and archaic regulations which existed. They were a legacy from the British. I refer in particular to the regulation as to the type of people allowed to frequent the Green. This is the people's property. It has been the scene of many historic events. It is the place where many of our famous men and many of our geniuses did a good deal of their thinking. George Bernard Shaw worked in Molesworth Street and he passed through the Green every day on his way to work. He may not be approved of as a literary giant by everybody. There may be objection to him from those who are not as liberal in their tastes as I am. The fact remains that Shaw did good work for this country and he stood by it when there were few prepared to stand by it. At times when the country took up positions which were, so to speak, internationally unpopular, Shaw was outspoken and honest in defence of this nation.
His literary works are well known. Deputy T. Lynch mentioned earlier that the Shaw Bequest has resulted in an additional £500,000 to the National Gallery. Very few men have done so much good in an artistic sense for this country. I have been campaigning for some time now to have the excellent statue of Shaw in the National Gallery on public view in St. Stephen's Green. In justice to him, that should be done. I have discussed this with the Parliamentary Secretary on numerous occasions. The matter is one in which the Minister for Education is also concerned. Dublin has produced many great figures—Shaw, O'Casey, Joyce and others. Tourists should be attracted here on the basis of this city having inspired some of the greatest literary giants of this century. One way in which that could be done is by making St. Stephen's Green a place where visitors could see the best possible representations we can obtain of these world famous literary men who have added to the lustre and glory of the nation.
Not a car park.
Not a car park—not an inch.
I should like to compliment the Parliamentary Secretary and the Office of Public Works on the progress achieved in the past 12 months. Deputy Lynch said some of the drainage was no use and that it was ridiculous. I think the drainage done has proved itself by improving the land of the farmers nearly 100 per cent. The more I see done, the better I like it, especially if it is done in the western counties, where the farms are so small that one acre of land is as important as 30 to 40 acres to a man farming in the midlands
I see the results of the Corrib drainage and the pasture land now available for pasture. At the moment, drainage is being done along the shores of the Corrib. That creates more arable land and opens up turbary rights to which there was no access hitherto. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will continue this good work and extend it further south of the Corrib. Some years ago, the Corrib-Mask scheme was cut in two. That was done by someone who was unfamiliar with the countryside. A certain amount of that was ridiculous, if you like, because a machine had to be brought right around that 30 mile stretch of water before it could enter on the northern side again.
With regard to school buildings, it would be no harm if the Parliamentary Secretary had a look at existing schools built some 30 or 40 years ago to see if it is not possible now to connect them up with piped water supplies. Garda barracks should also be connected. These amenities are very important now and the children in our schools or the Garda should not be deprived of them.
There is a sum of £43,000 provided in the Estimate for improvement works on small harbours around our coasts. If this sum is for small harbours which have not been touched up to the present, I welcome it more than I can say. Along the western seaboard, fishing used be done by the sailing boat or the rowboat. That pattern has changed. The majority of fishermen have either an outboard engine or a Lister engine. A Lister diesel engine has the propeller underneath and the boatmen with these engines cannot approach some of our fishing harbours without the risk of damaging the propeller underneath. I suggest a survey should be made to find out the piers where most of the fishermen come to land. Some piers and harbours are more sheltered than others. In my own parish there is a pier called Ard West where there are about a dozen boats, some of which are out on hire purchase, if they have not already been bought from Gael Linn. The way into this harbour is almost impossible. There are some rocks there which it would not cost more than £20 or £30 to remove and I think the same can be said of many landing places in the western counties.
Another matter which the Office should consider in a general way where boats are landing fish is that of silting up year by year. Nobody seems to have responsibility for clearing away the silt and it must finally rest with the Office of Public Works to do something about it. The local authority will tell you they have no responsibility for clearing away the silt.
I should like to compliment the Parliamentary Secretary on the speedy way he provided the lights for Killeaney Harbour. I have been talking to the fishermen and they are more than satisfied. However, there is one other problem I would ask him to investigate. Some few years ago, we had a storm and a high tide. There are beacons for the guidance of fishermen leading to the pier and one of them was undermined by the sea and eventually knocked down. These beacons were kept whitewashed and the boats were able to come in at the deepest part of the harbour. The one knocked down has never been rebuilt and I should like something to be done about it so as to eliminate the danger at this point.
I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will have something to say in connection with silting at piers in general. If he has no responsibility, perhaps he would give us an idea what Department has the responsibility. Again, I congratulate him and the Office of Public Works on the work they have done in the past 12 months, and I feel sure they will continue that good work in the future.
I very much appreciate the tribute paid by Deputy Geoghegan to the work done on the Corrib scheme. I recall that the Corrib scheme was very far down the list until the inter-Party Government took over. While it may be a belated tribute, it is one we appreciate on this side of the House because there would be no Corrib scheme, if there had been no inter-Party Government. The importance of this scheme cannot be sufficiently stressed, the importance of the drainage of both land and bog on the upper reaches at Oughterard, Ross and around that country and parts of the east and the provision of turbary which is very much needed. I should like to see an increased grant for roads in the Connemara area.
The Parliamentary Secretary is not responsible for roads.
I thought it would come under the heading of minor relief schemes.
I got the point home anyway and the Parliamentary Secretary can take note.
That is a hint to the Chair to be more watchful.
I should like to know what happened in regard to the proposed extension of Kilronan Pier. We hear a lot of talk about trying to encourage fishing off the west coast and all the coasts but where there is a long indented coastline such as that off County Galway, there is a great need for proper facilities, especially at the pier of Kilronan. This has been going on and on, and I suppose it will be like the Galway harbour scheme and we shall have to wait but as long as I am in this House, I shall agitate until something is done in that respect. I have seen pressure being brought to bear in this matter in the past. I have seen a pier built in a field and only touched by water at high tide. This was built as a result of pressure groups having got to work, while demands for piers that were really needed were ignored. There is also the question of slips and I do not have to impress on the Parliamentary Secretary the number of requests he has in his area for these slips and piers.
In my area?
They all come under the same heading. Maybe the Parliamentary Secretary is not conversant with these slips as we know them in the west.
Bhí conaí orm i gCathair na Gaillimhe fadó.
You do not see many slips i gCathair na Gaillimhe but around the coast there is a need for such facilities for the people who fish. We are very much behind in the provision of these facilities. In regard to harbours I must express disappointment that there is nothing beyond a mere mention of them in respect of the coming year. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Lands who is conversant with the matter should be able to throw a bit of light on the subject as to what the hopes are in the very near future or will that, too, be put on the long finger, an mhéar fhada mar chuan na Gallimhe?
When the question of a harbour is mentioned in Galway, be it a fishery harbour or the Galway harbour scheme, it generally gives rise to a scoff. For 14 years, we have been hearing, and still are hearing about this matter. The Minister made another statement last week that it will start shortly. I may be out of order on one question but I am quite in order as regards the fishing harbour and I should like to know when D-day will come. I mentioned roadworks, bog road schemes and road schemes to houses of people at the "back of beyond," houses of which the Parliamentary Secretary's car could not get within an ass's roar.
There are two Votes before the House—Nos. 8 and 9, Office of Public Works and Public Works and Buildings. No. 10— Employment and Emergency Schemes —is not before the House.
We shall debate it again. I am glad to note the proposal for improved accommodation for the Garda but I would like to draw attention to the need for provision of improved accommodation and married quarters at the Eglington Street barracks in Galway. This is anything but a credit to the Department of Justice or the Board of Works. Some facilities should be provided for young Gardaí who marry and find it hard to find accommodation for themselves.
I notice that £11,800 is provided for the President's Establishment. Since 1945 we have spent—on improving the residence and nothing to do with furnishing and gardening— £85,000. Have we gone "light"? What would that do towards the provision of houses of a cheaper type for the people? We are asking them to tighten their belts but I think the example should be set at the top and it is time steps were taken to halt grandiose expenditure. Is Árus an Uachtaráin something sacrosanct, something we must show the people each year? Over and above that £85,000 I think people are not aware of the hundreds of thousands provided not only for entertainments—I agree that a certain amount of entertaining must be done——
That is not involved in this Vote.
I know——
The Deputy says he knows but he sometimes adds "I got it in," which makes it seem clear to the Chair that he deliberately transgresses.
It is what is coming out of this Vote that I object to. A sum of £11,800 is to be spent in the Park this year. If we built a house from the foundation for that sum it should be good enough for anybody but the amount is to be spent only on improvements. Do they change the wallpaper every year up there? This is one place where I suggest there should be a chip of the knife.
All sides of the House appreciate the manner in which the Parliamentary Secretary has introduced this Vote. It is in keeping with the efficiency, vigour and interest that he has shown in carrying out the work of his office since he entered it. While that tribute is being paid from all sides, there is criticism of the work being done. The Parliamentary Secretary is responsible for public building but what is being done in renovating the Castle buildings where the administration and planning of the Government is made effective is criticised. People do not recognise the necessity for this work because they do not want to look at the matter as it should be considered, that buildings are leased and rented all over the city while more central buildings would be of greater advantage in carrying out the work of the nation. Useful employment is given no doubt in the erection and maintenance of these buildings and the buildings are a great asset in themselves.
We have the question of schools and education. Wonderful progress has been made in improving the quality of schools and in replacing national schools that had outlived their day. It would be very useful if the local authorities who should bring the water to the vicinity of the schools, and those in charge of the schools would co-operate in providing modern amenities for schools that are in fair condition and are not likely to be replaced for some years. The school provides the first step for the intellectual advancement of the nation. From there pupils proceed to higher education. We are told there are not enough engineers to carry out the public works required. Everybody cannot become an engineer and in order to enter the Faculty in a university students must get a high place—perhaps honours—in mathematics to show they have an aptitude for engineering and will be able to benefit by the instruction provided. When the engineers are qualified we hear criticism from certain parts of the House that the Government are not paying them enough. We have all had the experience that when local authorities require engineers and issue advertisements for them there is very great criticism of the standard of pay they offer. The very same members who are critical in the local authorities want the Government to raise the pay higher and establish standards to which they object in the authorities where they have a "say". That is all very well, but when the Government want money to pay higher salaries we know the attitude certain people adopt.
The next important work the Parliamentary Secretary has to do concerns the drainage and reclamation of land to make more of it fertile and thus have more production in our basic industry, agriculture. That work is most important because, while we talk about the flight from the land, works which would give useful employment in rural areas and along river banks and streams are vital to the national economy.
Basically, nobody can find fault with the Parliamentary Secretary's idea of doing one major catchment each year, if possible, in each of the four Provinces; but there are many intermediate rivers, streams going into lakes and into tidal waters, which could be done very efficiently by contract in many cases and without much engineering preparation. The rivers themselves are short. Their flow is easily seen and the defects in their courses are recognisable even to people who have very little engineering skill. Perhaps they could be dealt with in co-operation with the engineers of the county councils. Some of these are the old drainage board schemes and so on. If the Department concentrate on these, they will be doing a great national service.
The Government have only a certain amount of machinery which they must distribute throughout the country as best they can. There is always criticism if money is spent on buying more machinery, even though it enables us to do this work expeditiously. I would suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that these contractors be availed of to a greater extent than at present.
I represent a stretch of country in the middle of the largest county in Ireland. The only river mentioned there, the Ouvane, has been completed by contract. Part of the Deel comes into the county also. There are three intermediate rivers in which I am interested and which I have made the subject of questions in this House. One is the Owenabue, which flows through Ballinhassig and Carrigaline. I was in touch with the Department about this river some years ago. They told me that on an average the expenditure there would be the lowest of most of the small rivers under consideration; in other words, that there would be more productive results from dealing with that river and that it was, therefore, placed high on the list.
I know that at one time, because this river had once been a drainage board responsibility, the county council engineer presented a scheme to the Department costing only a few thousand pounds but it was turned down before the present Parliamentary Secretary's time, because it was said what was proposed would not be of permanent advantage. As if anything in that line can be of permanent advantage! Members from all sides have stressed that subsequent maintenance is all important. If work is competently done at the start, sufficient money should be made available for subsequent maintenance. Any work done subsequently is, therefore, of advantage. I would stress to the Parliamentary Secretary again the local demand there has been for years for attention to that river.
Another river is the river from Ballinaspittal to Garrettstown. It is on a different basis because 15 or 20 years ago the farmers on the adjoining lands contributed something towards the clearing of that river. Some sluices were put up but they are ineffective today. That work would not cost a tremendous amount of money. The local landowners are anxious it should be done while the weather is favourable. I think a scheme has gone to the Parliamentary Secretary's office in regard to that proposal.
The third river I should like to mention is the Maglin river, which flows into the tidal waters of the Lee. Here again a great amount of land could be reclaimed at very little expense. I hold that local contractors would be quite competent to do that work.
We have had mention of piers and major fishery harbours. There has been some criticism about spending money on places where very little fish has been landed. Very little fish has been landed because the piers are not in a satisfactory condition to take the boats that would use them. That must be put right in the first instance.
Around our coasts are small harbours. In some cases the county councils might co-operate with the Department in improving matters for the local fishermen. These men do a certain amount of fishing as a sideline. They may have a small amount of land. If they are near the coast and in favourable conditions, they may produce potatoes and vegetables early in the season. At other times they devote themselves to inshore fishing locally.
Those are projects on which money can always be usefully spent. They are productive in their own way. They help to keep people in the rural areas. They live in little hamlets and communities. If life were made attractive for them and if their income were sufficient, they would be content to carry on in their day the heritage that has come down to them. If we are neglectful and they lose their aptitude and knowledge of the skills handed down from their ancestors, the work will go and, consequently, the people will go also. Our rural areas will continue to be denuded of population. I am sure the Parliamentary Secretary and his officials will employ their best endeavours to make their work effective. It is from the debates on these Estimates that the Parliamentary Secretary and his officials get the views of Deputies. I feel sure these views will be respected when they show a knowledge of the circumstances which it would be advantageous to promote, and in consequence I think that by promoting the work as it is being done, and speeding it up wherever possible, we will be adding to the productivity of the nation and will give the people confidence that our basic industries are being developed energetically and being made more efficient to the general advantage of our people.
The amount of work for which the Office of Public Works is responsible is large and varied. It is the agency responsible for buildings for most Departments of State and, consequently, at this time of the year Deputies' interests in the debate are also wide and varied depending on the items in respect of which they wish to intervene. I think the work that is being done by the Parliamentary Secretary and the staff is admirable. I have said on previous occasions here that the small staffs available for the large amount of work to be done really deserve credit and praise for the interest they take in the many projects they have to handle.
One thing that worries me is the numbers of the staff in the decentralised portions of the Board of Works who are expected to cover large areas and be responsible for the supervision of a large amount of work. If faults arise, and they do from time to time, it is unreasonable that all the blame should lie on the people who are expected to be on the spot.
I should like to think that the moneys being expended by the State in regard to the provisions of new buildings of any kind, whether State or semi-State, are being well spent and that the staffs made available are sufficient to ensure that the work is well done. That is difficult at times for staffs in the country. I have seen the type of work I refer to and can say that a very large volume of it requires great concentration on the part of the staff if they are to ensure that the taxpayers' money is spent in the right manner. As I have said, there will be faults and these are brought to the attention of the Office of Public Works to be remedied.
The last speaker mentioned the appointment of engineers and I think the Parliamentary Secretary made a similar reference last year when he said that his Office were adopting a new system of training which would bring in new technical staff more in line with our needs. This is a type of development that is most desirable. I shall not now go into the question of engineers and their remuneration but I think that in the long run if we are to retain an efficient technical staff we must be prepared to pay them.
I have a particular interest in schools, being a teacher myself, and it has often struck me as being rather strange that in the matter of school buildings we do not establish a liaison between the people who work in the schools and the people who design them. I know there is a liaison between the Department of Education and the Office of Public Works but I believe practical problems which have arisen from time to time, and which still arise, could be remedied without any undue expenditure of time, labour or money, if the necessary liaison existed.
Schools being erected at the present time are generally satisfactory, and look well, but I cannot understand why we should limit ourselves so severely in regard to the unit standard of capacity or measurement in regard to the individual pupil. We have been wont to limit the space of a room to 11 square feet per pupil. In country areas where there is a tendency for the population to increase this has led to the necessity in many schools to add a new classroom later on. We could avoid such a necessity if we did not in the first instance so stringently limit ourselves in the way I have referred to.
The Parliamentary Secretary spoke of the desirability of providing classrooms, and space in and around them, not only with the interests of the educational life of the child in mind but equally so his play-time. I would have liked to have heard a little more about this feature in the context of the new development of schoolrooms. I refer in particular to the question of using separate tables and small chairs. I can understand that as being a suitable development for infant schools but I do not see how it can become so readily adaptable where more senior schools are concerned. I believe the conventional desk will always remain as the type of equipment most suited to the needs of the more senior pupils.
As far as infants are concerned, this type of kindergarten table is a very welcome innovation. There is, however, one point in regard to it which I would put to the designers of this type of equipment. There should be underneath such a table a sort of tray or receptacle where the pupils' equipment, whether it be plasticine, beads or other infant equipment, could be kept during a lesson. I suggest that these tables could usefully carry a shelf underneath where the child's beads or other such equipment, could kept during a lesson.
The type of rail in schools on which maps and charts are displayed is a matter on which the views of teachers should be sought. Rails are at present being erected in schools which are not sufficiently high to take maps or charts, particularly charts. This is particularly true in the case of infant schools where the teacher depends so much on the use of pictures and charts in instruction work. I know that the Parliamentary Secretary has been taking a keen interest in this matter and this type of school and I would suggest the use of pegboard on a couple of walls particularly in infant schools. This would be a most useful addition inasmuch as the teacher might readily assemble pictures and as readily store them away. The use of pictures and other aids such as diagrams and charts is something which is coming into its own in education and large stocks of these can be accumulated over the years. Therefore the day when you had one placed on exhibition permanently is gone and there has to be a more ready form of dealing with them. This, I think, is one of the ways in which that could be done.
In regard to the rail which carries the maps in the classrooms for senior standards, I have noticed, and this is particularly true in the lower schools, that they had to be hung on the wall opposite the teacher which was generally the wall at the back of the pupils. I would suggest that for senior classes there should be incorporated in all schools a similar type of map case in which the maps could be readily displayed and as readily stored and that they could be folded back on the roller blind style. They would last longer and when needed would be available at once.
I should have liked to have heard more from the Parliamentary Secretary about the use of the corridor in the newer type school. There are quite a number of schools of thought in regard to this matter. Generally, the corridor has fulfilled a useful function in that when a class is being brought from the open into the buildings or being taken from them, the pupils can be marshalled. I do not know how in the ordinary way pupils would be passed from the building if you did not have something like that to allow them into the open or to the toilet accommodation available in the school itself. The amount of toilet accommodation available in schools naturally is not for large numbers at one time.
The question of teaching techniques was raised and I should have liked to have heard from the Parliamentary Secretary what exactly he envisaged in that respect. Was there any particular matter in mind?
What was the point? I did not catch it.
The Parliamentary Secretary mentioned the question of the:
...standard of facilities in Primary Schools so that teaching techniques can progress in line with current and probable future trends. The intention is that the schoolhouse should come to be regarded not merely as a place of instruction but as a place where all child activities, including play, can find full expression.
I take it that the Parliamentary Secretary may have something in mind with regard to a type of assembly hall. Was there any intention to do anything of that nature in regard to schools in the future, even small assembly halls where pupils might be assembled for drama or for choral work? I know it is a feature of some larger schools, where assembly halls are used for that purpose, but they have not been available in small schools. Even if one wished to bring the pupils together, one would not be able to fit them. Of course if you have removable tables which you could stack, it would be possible to do that, but of course at the same time you would need seating accommodation.
I know that there are rigid standards in regard to the size of classrooms but I would seriously suggest that they might be liberalised because the addition of a few extra pupils to a room can result in serious overcrowding of the seating accommodation available at the time. We can always introduce a new desk or two to the room, if it is of the necessary size and we can always admit four or five or ten extra pupils to a school, if we are not too tightened up in regard to the amount of accommodation allowed per individual pupil. I should like to see more liberalisation in that respect. I know that in regard to these technical arrangements within the school, the Office of Public Works is acting as an agent of the Department of Education. I have on previous occasions mentioned this when this Vote came up and I shall do so again, but I am sure the Parliamentary Secretary could do much with his colleague, the Minister for Education, if he mentioned these as desirable trends in school buildings.
Garda housing was also mentioned and this is something in which a lot of people have an interest. I should like to ask whether it is the intention that the funds being made available under this Vote will be passed on to the National Building Agency. In regard to the building programme, are they to be divided as between the Office of Public Works and the Building Agency, or is there to be a joint effort between them, or is the National Building Agency to act as an agent for the Office of Public Works? The National Building Agency has been dealing with housing for State servants in various places and now mention is made of the Garda Síochána and is it the intention that the National Building Agency will be financed partly by the Office of Public Works for this matter?
I suppose the Deputy from Galway on my own side will not be glad to hear me mention item No. 37, the Fishery Research Station, but I should just like to ask whether this is in conjunction with, or in substitution for, the station already down there? This is a research station and they did have a plant, and perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary will say whether this is something different or could the existing buildings be used. I understand they were not used as fully as they might have been. Is there any question of using some of the available space there or in any way incorporating it with this new type of building?
I welcome the extension of the National Gallery. Hitherto, it has not been possible adequately to display our national treasures. More space will enhance the National Gallery and make a visit there more pleasant not alone for Irish people but for visitors from abroad. It will enable the staff there to display works which are the heritage of the nation to better advantage.
I wonder if I may refer to the new building for the Department of Social Welfare at Haddington Road?
It will be for the Department of Health and the Department of Social Welfare.
Aras Mhic Dhiarmada is located in the centre of the city—the Busáras. The upper portion of it is used by the Department of Social Welfare. I presume the intention is to vacate the Busáras. I notice that £1¾ million, approximately, is reserved for these new works.
CIE have quite a few offices in the heart of Dublin. Of course, they have indicated their need of these offices. However, with Kingsbridge and Amiens Street available to them, I cannot understand why they have had to use part of the Busáras as well. It is somewhat strange that, with office premises available in such a large building as the Busáras, a sum of £1¾ million has had to be laid aside for a new building for the needs of the Department of Social Welfare.
That would seem to be a matter for the Estimate for the Department of Social Welfare.
I think there is a provision of £10,000——
——this year, but you have earmarked a sum of over £1¾ million. However, I shall raise the matter on the Estimate for the Department of Social Welfare if the Parliamentary Secretary is not responsible for it. I realise he has to carry out the works if he is asked to do so.
You can give him "the works", can you not?
Not too relevantly.
I was very glad to note that we are at work on the Deel and that other works in east and west Limerick are in train. I want to raise the question of employment in this connection. I have received information privately in the matter but it might be no harm if the Parliamentary Secretary would deal in this House with the question of the employment of men. The impression has been created, for instance, that men over 50 years are not employed.
That is wrong.
Privately, I learned it is wrong. Take for instance the situation where UA men are taken on before men drawing stamps. This has created the impression that sometimes younger men, sometimes older men, sometimes single men, are taken on before married men. They do not seem to understand the position. I take it that the Office of Public Works have to maintain the canons imposed by the Department of Social Welfare in that respect so that, in drawing their personnel from the Labour Exchange at present, they must take UA men before men drawing stamps and, even if the UA man is single, he is taken on before his married counterpart. That is rather strange.
It is a tragedy if a married man with a family who is on stamps—and he is not drawing a large amount—must remain unemployed while a single man on UA is given the job.
I think that could be argued on the Estimate for the Department of Social Welfare.
I might argue it on that Estimate but it arises equally here because, in the employment of labour, a question arises if the Office of Public Works, in drawing their personnel from the employment exchange, are not free agents in respect of the type of people they draw.
Very good work is being done on the erection of banks. A difficulty arises which seriously troubles the man whose land is bearing the brunt in respect of the erection of the bank. The matter of compensation is not in question at the moment. However, take a man with a small area of land. The Office of Public Works moves in on it to carry out work which is necessary and desirable. If the owner finds that a large portion of his land has been trespassed on, perhaps to the point of making it unworkable for years, and seriously affects his small area of land, naturally, he has a right to feel aggrieved. Undoubtedly, this work must be done for the greater benefit of the community but, perhaps, the Parliamentary Secretary could see some way of solving this problem, particularly where there is a question of raising an embankment as against an existing one and where it means moving back on to the land, for instance, of a smallholder. That is particularly true in respect of parts of the Shannon where new sluices are being erected. The Parliamentary Secretary will know about this. The small landowner feels he has a genuine grievance here.
I am aware of the amount of work the Office of Public Works are doing. I realise how widespread are the ramifications of that work. The Office of Public Works is subject to requests from all Departments. It is very easy to be critical of any facet of work which they must carry out. Having seen the Office of Public Works at work, having seen the types of work they do, having seen the types of improvisation they must do and the amount of detailed attention they must give to the works, I should like to pay tribute to the officials of the Parliamentary Secretary's office and to himself for the increased drive which has been apparent in it. I believe we are imposing too much on some local staff where there is a large area to be supervised. We cannot expect the same degree of supervision when they have a wide area to cover. I know they are a dedicated group. Any time I have had recourse to the Parliamentary Secretary or his officers, I met with every courtesy. I hope that any criticism I have made will be taken as having been offered in a constructive spirit.
I was interested in the Parliamentary Secretary's reference to the drainage of the Boyne. That work will cover quite a number of counties, about five or six in all. I want to inform him that County Meath will bear the main cost in regard to maintenance after the river has been cleared. It will be costly on County Meath. Since it will be about three years before that work is started, I should like to see some way devised to help in financing the maintenance of the river after it has been cleaned. There will be one big problem. Bord na Móna are running a lot of silt into the Boyne. It is having an effect on land 20 miles down and is clogging up drains. There will be more silt in the Boyne than there was in any of the rivers of which the Parliamentary Secretary has experience.
The Boyne is roughly 285 feet above sea level. It runs for about 80 miles and falls only about three feet per mile. We may take it that it is level, and it is very slow-moving. The build-up of silt will have to be dealt with. I imagine this will be the biggest drainage scheme undertaken by the Office of Public Works since the Arterial Drainage Act came into operation. The Boyne covers a very wide area. It runs through Meath. There is its tributary the Blackwater at Navan and the other Blackwater goes from Longwood into Kildare.
In another part of my constituency, there is the Brosna which was one of the first rivers to be drained under the scheme. The farmers found that quite an amount of land was pegged and drains were pegged right up to the end. Quite a number of drains were pegged and not cleaned at all. Anywhere I have seen drains pegged, they definitely needed to be drained. I should like to impress on the Parliamentary Secretary that anywhere his engineers have placed those red pegs, it is vitally important that those drains be cleaned. False hopes should not be raised such as were raised amongst the people of Westmeath in regard to the Brosna drainage scheme. I had numerous requests to see if anything could be done. I can assure the Parliamentary Secretary that where there are pegs, drainage definitely needs to be done.
I was glad to see the Parliamentary Secretary's reference to Garda barracks, and in particular, to married quarters for the Garda. It is rather hard on a married Garda to have to find accommodation when he is moved from one town to another. At present it is particularly hard for anyone coming into a town to get accommodation straight away. Providing accommodation for them is a step in the right direction. I think the houses should be built exactly the same, so that when a married man is moved from one town to another, his carpeting and his furniture will fit into the new house. The design of the houses should be exactly the same. That would have the effect that everyone would know that a house was a Garda house, but from the married man's point of view, it would be convenient.
There is too much time between taking a decision to build a Garda barracks and the building of the new station. Sometimes it takes five, six or seven years. Sites have to be looked for and between one thing and another, it seems to be a slow and laborious process. Something should be done to speed it up. There are proposals for a new Garda barracks in Kinnegad. This matter has been mooted for the past four or five years. I understand negotiations for the acquisition of a site have been in progress for years past. I hope the matter is nearer solution and that the building will soon be going up.
The Parliamentary Secretary is to be complimented on the design of the barracks in Enfield, the selection of the site and every other aspect of that building. It is one that any country could be proud of. New ideas have been incorporated in the design. The accommodation for the prisoners shows progressive ideas. The sergeant's quarters are just a little way from the main building. The whole design shows a new outlook which I hope will be maintained in the Office of Public Works.
One further feature about this building is that it is about 40 feet in from the road. There is a flower bed in front which sets off the building extremely well. The building is on the main Dublin-Galway-Sligo trunk road to the west and it is important that such buildings as Garda barracks should create a good impression.
I would suggest that the Office of Public Works should take over ancient monuments and not let them further deteriorate. I have made representations that Rattan Castle should be taken over but so far that has not been deemed necessary. This castle was one of the castles of the Pale and is of historic value. The members of the Archaeological Society in a neighbouring county came to view the castle on one of their outings. If the castle is not preserved by the Office of Public Works, it will be only a matter of time until it completely disintegrates. There should be greater interest taken in the preservation of ancient monuments.
I am gratified at the adoption of new ideas in relation to school building. That is a step in the right direction. It is interesting to note that the Parliamentary Secretary was able to provide for larger schoolrooms without necessitating an increase in the amount of timber, slates or tiles used in the construction. I am pleased that it has been possible to have variations in the design of schools.
There has been a transformation in school buildings in the past few years. The new classrooms provided are bright and airy in contrast to those of former days when classrooms consisted of four walls and very little more. Education has become increasingly important and everything possible should be done to help children to like school. Pleasant surroundings are an aid to study. I am glad that the old-fashioned desks have been substituted by tables and chairs that can be stacked neatly. In rural areas schools are occasionally used for parochial meetings and other purposes. It can be said of the old desks that they could withstand a great deal of hard wear. The substitution of tables and chairs for the old type of desk will facilitate the organisers of parochial meetings. It will also mean that the children who are accustomed to tables and chairs in their own homes will not find the school furniture strange to them.
I should like to thank the Office of Public Works for the courteous way I have been treated on any occasion that I have made representations to them and to compliment them on not being afraid to adopt new ideas.
I should like to refer now to the question of a memorial to Gardaí who have died in the course of their duties. That is a memorial that should have been erected. However, better late than never. We have, I might remark, always been good about remembering our dead and paying due respect to them. I am glad that the Parliamentary Secretary is now taking steps to remedy the situation that existed.
I do not always approve as to the appropriateness of Ministers appointed to different Departments but, in the case of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance, I have no reservations whatsoever. The right man is in the right job. That, I am sure, is a more valuable tribute coming from this side of the House than it would be if it came from Deputy Burke on the Parliamentary Secretary's own side of the House. I do not intend to say much on the subject of arterial drainage and I intend to say nothing at all about Aras an Uachtaráin. I do not know a great deal about the first and enough has, I think, been said about the second. I agree with Deputy McQuillan that professional men like engineers must be offered rewards commensurate with the rewards they can get elsewhere. If we do not offer these rewards we will not get the men. That is the only suggestion I have to make with regard to arterial drainage.
The Parliamentary Secretary has brought considerable forwardness of mind to his job. He is not sitting down on it and he has, apparently, succeeded in imposing himself upon his office. The Parliamentary Secretary has excellent taste and he has given us evidence of that taste in the maintenance and preservation of our national monuments, our historic buildings, and our contemporary buildings as well. I should like to encourage him to do more than just make skilful use of space. Low relief sculpture is an excellent thing and, indeed, in some buildings free standing sculpture might be employed. We have no Medicis in this modern world but the Scandinavians have shown us how well these things can be done. I would recommend, too, the growing of trees and foliage around new buildings.
Deputy McQuillan referred to building from pre-stressed concrete. I have no doubt we could provide a cheap enough job in that way but it would, I am afraid, result in a monotony of building. That would be a pity. Monotony is one thing we should try to avoid. We have not got a great deal to offer in the way of architectural variety. We should seek to improve the situation. What we do must be executed in excellent taste. We must avoid standardisation and too much uniformity.
It is quite obvious now that the stone in Leinster House is of very poor quality. Since the crust was removed it shows signs of considerable devastation. I do not know what can be done about this yellow stone, but I should like to see it improved.
Must the moneys for the National Gallery come from the Central Fund? The authorities will acquire an enormous amount of money from the Shaw Bequest. It will be about £1 million by the time the film is finished. Is the Bequest so framed that we cannot spend the money on housing the pictures?
Buying the pictures.
Surely we should be permitted to provide housing for them? It seems an enormous amount of money for just that particular purpose.
I disagree with my colleague, Deputy Lynch, when he says we should not do things like restoring Dublin Castle until better times come. The fact is better times will never come. From this on because of the inflationary spiral, everything will be more expensive. If we do not attend to these things now the problem will be a more difficult one if left for solution in the future. These things are part of our history and this is a responsibility we cannot evade. We must preserve. It would be a good idea, I think, if some of these old historic abbeys and castles were re-roofed. The roof of the cathedral on the Rock of Cashel did not perish because of the passage of time; it perished through the pilfering by the local parson of the Church of Ireland 200 years ago. Had the roof been left untouched that cathedral would be very well preserved to-day.
These abbeys and castles are extremely valuable. Apart from our own national pride in them, they provide an enormous tourist attraction. If they were re-roofed another thousand years would be added to their lives. I do not think it would be a very costly job. We must do something to make up for the centuries of neglect by the British and our own neglect over the past 30 or 40 years. The Bunratty Castle development is an excellent one. I believe it is being put to the correct use and it provides a headline showing what could be done in other places.
Another matter I should like to mention is the fact that so many of our public buildings are surrounded by heavy, ugly railings. These were put there by the British. Generally, they are around courthouses. It is extraordinary how hidebound public officials and others are in matters of this kind. Probably the best building in the city of Cork is the courthouse. It is a very graceful, classical building, completely ruined by the ugly railing. For the past eight years, I have been trying to get proposals accepted by the Corporation for the removal of these railings. The removal would give the locality in which the building stands almost a continental aspect. The building itself would be set off much more gracefully and the street would be enhanced by the effect.
It took a long time to convince the Corporation that they might do it and the City Manager told me the Department—which Department I do not know—would not agree. They felt the railings were a protection. That is ridiculous. Some of the local people said it would be a dreadful thing because people would sit on the steps. I do not know what is wrong with the human beings of Ireland sitting on the steps of good buildings. I see everything wrong with the erection of ugly and unsightly railings. It seems to be another bit of evidence of the slavery of the past in our minds.
There is one national monument here which has suffered a great deal over the years, that is the centre of Dublin. I speak about the historical centre of Dublin—not the shopping centre—where Emmet was executed, around High Street and Thomas Street. That whole area should be designated as one public monument but it has gone to rack and ruin and to seed. It could be the most attractive part of Dublin if steps had been taken 100 years ago, not now, to preserve it. I am afraid it has gone too far but if the Parliamentary Secretary could do anything about it it would be an excellent thing to do.
I wonder could the Parliamentary Secretary or anybody else do anything about those dreadful tree trunks along the quays from which flags are flown on certain occasions? They have ruined the quays of Dublin and should be got rid of before we all feel ashamed.
Dublin Corporation.
I do not know who is responsible but it is a deplorable thing. If the Parliamentary Secretary, with the good mind he has about these things, could tour the whole country he could fill a few notebooks with useful things to be done, if not by him at least by his successor.
I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to promote the courageous use of colour in the schools. We have always been afraid of colour here. There has been a slight improvement in recent years. If the child is accustomed to the use of fresh, cheerful colours around him it will influence him for the rest of his life. It is at the schoolroom stage we must do it.
I do not know what responsibility the Board of Works have for the buildings at Shannon Airport but their appearance is very bad. Someone must do something about that. It is a gateway and the airport is important. Millions of pounds have been spent on runways but the buildings are showing the signs of their 16 or 20 years of age.
The sum of what I have said is that I am glad the Parliamentary Secretary is doing his job well. The good taste he seems to have displayed and the imagination we know he has are very useful in the Office. He should not be depressed at difficulties because he will run into many of them from his own colleagues, the Department and others throughout the country. In this country we have had 600 years of slavery and anything new will be resisted by old fashioned people. I would suggest he should establish a very good public relations service so that people will know what he is doing and so that he will leave his impress on the Department when he leaves it. The only thing that is worth doing, and the only rewarding thing is the thing that meets with the most opposition. We are the most Tory and conservative people on the face of the earth and the man with new ideas will have a hard time. The only advice I have to give to the Parliamentary Secretary is to keep on the way he has gone so far.
I note the reference to the work that is being carried out in Leinster House. It is long overdue. These improvements are necessary but I do not see any reference to what, to me, resembles a zoo. Apparently the Parliamentary Secretary has not got to the point of removing the cage. Perhaps it may have been used for other purposes one time but even if we are in danger of a little cross fire from above it might do us no harm. The sooner we remove this wire netting the better it will be for this Chamber.
It is not because of cross fire but it would be a bad thing to take it down. If one sits up there one does not notice it. How would the Deputy feel if someone fell down on top of him?
Or jumped down?
Yes.
I have been up there before being a Deputy and afterwards and one of the big dangers of being in the front row is that one's nose might get caught between the wire. I am not trying to score points in this regard. Undoubtedly, many necessary improvements have been made but it is not beyond the capabilities of our staff in the Board of Works to design something that might be a protection to people and at the same time improve the amenities of the Chamber.
Again, I am pleased to note the report by the Parliamentary Secretary about improvements in salaries for members of the professional staff. Too long had it been a case of men being underpaid and, undoubtedly, over the years, irrespective of the Government in power, we did lose the services of young and brilliant men because they were not being paid what they should have been paid for the work they were doing in the Board of Works. If we have now reached the stage of showing these young people we are offering them a fair return for their services, then it will be a great incentive to young men to join the staff in the Office of Public Works and we shall hear less of what perhaps was never true but what was so often said by people outside: how did so and so get into the Board of Works?
On page 5 the Parliamentary Secretary has drawn attention to the question of the co-ordination of services between the Board of Works and the Department of Education in connection with school buildings. It says here: "Developments undertaken jointly by the Department of Education and the Office of Public Works to raise the standard of facilities in primary schools." Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary has nothing to do with this work but we find in Cork city and county—and I am sure it applies equally in other areas—that while we are getting primary schools well built and well supervised, they are too small. For instance, in one particular case in Douglas there are five rooms and six teachers. Perhaps, the Parliamentary Secretary, on the advice of the experts in his Office, will look into the question of providing sufficient accommodation at the start instead of adding a room or two which, as the Parliamentary Secretary will know, costs quite an amount of money.
Mention is made on page 2 of the building of Garda barracks. Between the other Department and the Board of Works, there has been a lot of coming and going, deciding and changing of decisions about where and when the Garda barracks will be built in Kinsale. The problem existed before the Parliamentary Secretary even took office. The proposed site has been varied and changed from one place to another. I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to investigate this personally because it is essential that the building be completed as soon as possible. Since the Parliamentary Secretary's speech did not mention Kinsale it may be worth inquiring whether the delay is due to the Department of Justice or some technical hold-up in the Board of Works.
It is true that one major drainage scheme has been completed on the Ouvane river in West Cork but I should like to draw the Parliamentary Secretary's attention to another river that has been giving much trouble over the years and is now giving greater trouble, the Owenabue. Since the new airport was constructed, the alteration of the terrain about the airport has caused an enormous extra amount of flooding of this river which laid waste considerable areas of land, even in the past, around the Ballinhassig area, adding to the problem that existed around other areas. This is a matter that needs investigation. Because of the heavier volume of water coming from the area around the airport the flooding in these areas in the past couple of winters has been greater.
I am sorry that since Deputy Barry has gone, I have here no colleague from Cork city with whom to chew the rag over this matter but it may not be all the fault of the Parliamentary Secretary or the Board of Works. Much of this problem may arise from the fact that Cork Harbour Commissioners are responsible for part of the river. When I raised the matter in a Parliamentary question, I was told that it was a matter for the Harbour Board, and the Harbour Board say it is a matter for the Department. Here we have a public body and a State Department each throwing responsibility on the other. I do not want to take from the credit due to the Parliamentary Secretary, even though we may not have agreed very often in this House, any more than Deputy Barry who may be more friendly with him over the years, but if the Parliamentary Secretary looks into this matter, he may find that some of the problems of this river may be traced back to Cork Harbour Commissioners. If we can do anything to stir them into action, it will benefit all concerned.
I sympathise with the person in charge of the Board of Works, and even more with the staff. Irrespective of the Party in Government, time and again complaints are made here— perhaps rightly. But going back to the roots of the trouble in many cases we find that the Board of Works is in such a position, in being at the beck and call of so many Departments, that it is totally unfair to expect from it the volume of work which is expected of it. I say that with a full sense of responsibility. I believe other Departments should, in fairness, provide staffs for themselves and not put the onus for everything on the Board of Works.
Throughout the country, people raise problems which Deputies may raise here but the ultimate answer seems to give the impression outside that everything wrong in Dáil Éireann is attributable to the Board of Works. Too many jokes have been made about it by people who did not know enough to see that it was unfair to criticise where criticism was not warranted. At least some of the work that is put on the Parliamentary Secretary and his staff should be switched to other Ministers and Departments who should accept that responsibility rather than blame the Board of Works whenever it suits them.
I do not propose to delay the House very long in discussing this Vote. What particularly interests me, as a country Deputy, is drainage, but there are other aspects of the Vote on which I want to compliment the Parliamentary Secretary. We see that money is well spent here. This is the face of our national Government and it is only right that it should be presented not only from a legislators' point of view but also from the point of view of those who visit this House. I am glad to hear that we shall have amplification here after the Summer Recess. That will be a very useful amenity for the House.
The bill this year has increased under Vote 9 by some £451,000 and under Vote 8, by £24,740. Some of the increase in Vote 8 is attributed to the training of architectural assistants. It is a good development to see young men brought in and trained and it refutes the allegation, as it were, that the Parliamentary Secretary may not be doing all he can to strengthen his staff sufficiently to carry out the duties involved. Delays occur from time to time on account of shortage of engineers and other technical staff, but, having regard to the finances of the country, I think the present staff are adequate. Remembering the amount of money that can be found or, indeed, spent, I do not think it is right to say there is not sufficient staff.
It may be argued, and I can argue this myself, that in the western areas, surveys may take a very long time and a number of surveys may be going on at the same time. That requires a vast increase in staff but surveys without the necessary money to implement them and make them effective subsequently—they are no use lying in files—will get us nowhere. Having regard to everything, it can be said we do not want a considerable expansion in the staff of the Board of Works. They are doing an excellent job. I shall leave it at that.
The money being spent on Leinster House amounts to £150,000. The Parliamentary Secretary is satisfied that the scheme will be completed by the end of 1964. We all welcome the increased amenities being provided. I hope nothing will delay the progress of the scheme and that it will be completed by the end of the year.
There was criticism about spending money on the restoration and renovation of Dublin Castle. As Deputy A. Barry says—and I agree with him— these buildings are national monuments and their restoration and maintenance is necessary. They can be looked on with pride. These centres of alien rule must be preserved as a monument to the wonderful efforts of the people who fought for and obtained our freedom. Instead of putting a torch to these buildings as was done in the past, we should restore them as memorials to our martyrs. The buildings are being used by the Revenue Commissioners for a very useful purpose. The restoration of some of the bedrooms destroyed by fire is necessary and proper.
We all welcome the provision of Garda barracks and homes for Gardaí, but we would wish to see it progress even faster. However, we must have regard to the amount of money available. This year, the sum it is intended to expend, £625,000, is not small by any standard. We also welcome the decision to erect a memorial to deceased members of the Garda who have given devoted service to the nation. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to speed up the construction of new Garda barracks in my constituency of Sligo. I know there are plans for a number of them, but it seems to take a long time. I should like to see our Gardaí in Sligo well housed in comfortable quarters.
The primary school building programme this year runs to a figure of £1.9 million. One must compliment the Parliamentary Secretary on the wonderful work he did last year. He prognosticated that he would put up 130 new schools for contract, but in fact he put up 171—no mean achievement having regard to the amount of work required, the amount of negotiation with individual managers throughout the country and all the other factors. This Parliamentary Secretary has brought to the Board of Works a new stimulus of initiative and progress. One sees it reflected in his efforts to explore and investigate faster methods of building and better design.
I heard an Opposition Deputy recommend the method of prefabricated fast construction. I have been watching this development over a number of years. I think it tends towards ugly uniformity, and the statement that it is cheaper and faster is often largely fallacious. I have seen this form of construction used for the building of houses, secondary schools and halls of various kinds. I have seen it generally rejected after a time, for one reason or another. I would not be too keen on it for public buildings. I would prefer to see better design. Certainly we should use new building materials, but we should use them in conformity with good original designs rather than have this uniformity sometimes found. Schools are something we should be proud of. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to pursue his original ideas with all the vigour at his command, to ensure we have improved design and, if possible, better use of the many new building materials on the market. In this way, the uniformity we are inclined to have around the country can be eliminated.
We are to spend £140,000 on fishery harbours this year. The Parliamentary Secretary expresses the hope that work will commence on the Enniscrone pier during the coming year. I would ask him to ensure that the work will commence this year. It has been approved some time and, so far, has not started. Money has been provided for the building of large new schools for the Department of Agriculture at Athenry and Clonakilty. That is very welcome, but one would like to see more of that type of building going on.
I must compliment the Parliamentary Secretary on the effort he has been making in regard to arterial drainage. In the west, we see the work on the Moy, which extends to Mayo, Roscommon and Sligo, continuing apace. I do not know when it will be finished, but I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to give me some idea of when it may approach Sligo. The Owenmore is listed for surveying to start this year. As the Parliamentary Secretary is aware, it is a large catchment area serving a big number of people over a wide area. I would ask him to do everything he can to speed up the commencement of that survey. It will be of great benefit to the farmers there.
One is glad to hear that some of the intermediate schemes, such as the Duff river, are under way. I wish to thank the Parliamentary Secretary for verifying that he has placed contracts for that scheme.
I shall conclude by again referring to the wonderful efforts of the Parliamentary Secretary to restore and maintain our national monuments. Many of these have in the past been destroyed and no effort made to preserve them. One can now see from the vigorous interest taken by the Parliamentary Secretary that this will not be the case in the future. I want again to thank him and his staff for the courtesy they have extended to me personally throughout the year. I wish the Parliamentary Secretary well in his office which I know is in good and capable hands. The Office of Public Works needed a dynamic, energetic man and they have got him in the Parliamentary Secretary.
I have little to say beyond paying tribute to the Parliamentary Secretary for the wonderful work he has done in County Dublin during the past year. We have got quite a number of new national schools there and many more are on the stocks. I am grateful to him for his co-operation in that respect but I wish to raise my hardy annual on this Estimate in relation to the badly-needed extension and reconstruction at Skerries harbour. This problem has been the source of headaches over the years and we all hope it is coming to a successful conclusion.
I have already stressed the need for a programme of work in connection with coast erosion, which concerns us very much in County Dublin.
I shall now turn to the question of Garda stations. There is need for a new station at Clondalkin and I understand this will be attended to in the near future. If possible, the Parliamentary Secretary should devote attention to the condition of Garda stations generally throughout the country. Many of the present structures are cold, cheerless places, no encouragement to the young men who inhabit them to carry out their duties with enthusiasm and energy. These men do a great national service and it is very desirable their accommodation should be as comfortable as we can afford to give them. Another question I wish to raise is that of the condition of the old courthouses throughout the country. I know they are the responsibility of county councils, but justice is administered in them through the agency of the Department of Justice——
The Deputy is out of court on both counts.
He is a member of a county council.
These old courthouses are a disgrace to the country. At any rate, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I am delighted to see you back and your health restored again. We are all delighted to see you back.
Do not let this influence you at all, Sir. He is a member of Dublin County Council and he is responsible, as such, for the condition of the courthouses.
I shall not take advantage of you this evening, Sir.
The Deputy's good wishes were not for the Ceann Comhairle. He addressed the Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
I am sorry. Half my life, I have been putting my two feet in it. However, Sir, I said a nice few words about you. I shall conclude by congratulating the Parliamentary Secretary on the excellent work he has done since taking over in the office of Public Works. The people of County Dublin are very grateful to him.
I wish also to express my appreciation of the courtesy of the Parliamentary Secretary, especially in regard to his reception, at very short notice recently, of a deputation from the Brickey Drainage Committee. They and the people I represent are most grateful to him for the courteous manner in which he met them and listened to their points. I believe work is to commence on that drainage scheme but I would draw the Parliamentary Secretary's attention once more to the fact that suggestions have been put forward by landowners in the area for a slight extension of the scheme. I would ask him to give this application for an extension as favourable consideration as is possible. We appreciate in that area that the service we are already getting is excellent: the little extra we seek would make it practically completely satisfactory.
There is another question which the Parliamentary Secretary might be able to answer when he comes to reply. I missed the opportunity of getting in on the debate on the Vote for Posts and Telegraphs and thus was unable to bring to the Minister's attention the grave need for a new post office in Dungarvan. I understand a site has been secured and would like to know if the Board of Works have any proposal for building a post office there and, if so, when is work likely to begin. The present building is in a deplorable condition. Again, let me thank the Parliamentary Secretary for the manner in which, during the past year, he has dealt with any queries I have had to put to him and for the way in which he has received any deputation I have found it necessary to introduce.
I do not usually speak on this Vote but I want to say how glad we all are that the Board of Works are taking an increasing interest in Irish monuments of all periods. Dublin Castle is part of the history of this city and country and, as a Deputy from the other side of the House has said, the more we maintain it and show what a beautiful place it was, the more credit we give to the Irish people for having secured their freedom. That is a point of view which is highly commendable. I believe, however, that we should not divide up the past into different periods. We have all sorts of lovely monuments in Ireland, some of which may be associated with various sad periods of our history. That, however, does not mean necessarily they were always associated with sad periods.
Still less does it mean that the men who built and designed these beautiful buildings were not in themselves Irish architects or Irish craftsmen or Irish workmen. Therefore it is very good to see that we are proud of these things of the past, proud of what Irishmen, and, I am sure, Irishwomen too, did in building them and maintaining them and that we are going to hand on the beautiful and interesting things of the past. Our Board of Works, especially at present, are maintaining them and the present Parliamentary Secretary is taking a very civilised and up-to-date interest in this side of Irish life.
I might also mention, and I understand somebody did refer to this, the work that was done on some of these monuments. Far be it from me to denigrate what might be done in the way of cleaning or brightening those buildings, but apart from that, it is very good to see that nationally we do take a real interest in these ancient monuments. It has been charged against us at times that we did not take a sufficient interest in the past and did not maintain some of our buildings of great archaeological interest. Well, whatever truth there may have been at various times in that contention, it is not true nowadays and it is good to see that it is being done.
The Board of Works have a very skilled and erudite body of architects at their disposal. They have as fine a body of craftsmen as has any country in Western Europe. It is good to see that Ireland is making use of them and is maintaining the heritage of her past and ensuring that our people will realise that heritage which was given to us by all sorts of people in the past, Normans, and many different types now lost in the mists of antiquity, and doing what we can to roll back the mists and show the world what went on in this country even many thousands of years ago. As I said, that is not only of great interest to our young people but is of practical value from a tourist's point of view and I congratulate the Board of Works on carrying out that work with renewed interest and, indeed, with renewed care.
It is also good to see, and we should express our interest in it, what is being done in regard to schools and new Garda barracks, matters of completely modern interest. In many cases, we have a heritage of very poor and very old schools and there is a tremendous field for improvement and rebuilding in that respect. I am very glad to see that the Board of Works are doing what they can to modernise the schools and make them better places not only for the teachers but for the children. In conclusion, I may say that I am glad this wind is blowing and I assure the Parliamentary Secretary and the permanent officials that that meets with the approval of this side of the House.
I would be failing in my duty if, on this important Estimate, I did not seek to impress on the Parliamentary Secretary the importance of proceeding with all haste with that aspect of his Department which I regard as the most important, that is, the arterial drainage system. I am particularly concerned with arterial drainage in my constituency and I am concerned about the rather low place in priority which the important river Suir possesses. I understand that certain survey and design work has been carried out on this river but from a reply to a recent question to the Minister I was concerned to hear that it would be a number of years before we reach the drainage of this very important river.
No words of mine could express adequately the sufferings, deprivation and the hardship which our farmers in particular suffer as a result of the acute flooding from this river and its tributaries. In the fertile plains of Tipperary and its Golden Vale for some months of the year, on an annual basis, thousands of acres of arable land are inundated with water, livestock are cut off and many are lost, and the land is soured for many months. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to give to the river Suir its rightful place in his consideration for proceeding with arterial drainage. I would appreciate if the Parliamentary Secretary in his reply could indicate what he hopes to do to relieve flooding by this river and its tributaries.
I appreciate the great work which is being done by the Board of Works in relation to arterial drainage but I often felt that if this work were delegated to some other body, greater progress might be made. I have in mind delegating such work to our county councils. If they are competent enough to implement piped water and sewerage schemes throughout our counties at a cost of millions of pounds —some £3 million in my county—they should be relied on and they should be competent enough to cope with arterial drainage. I feel that very much more progress would be made. We have the problem that we cannot deal with the flooding of our tributaries until such time as the main artery is dredged or cleared. Obviously the county councils do not have the necessary money to tackle the tributaries and indeed I understand it would be unwise to attempt to treat these rivers because it seems one would only be passing the flood downstream and causing hardship for somebody else. I appreciate that it requires a plan, not merely for dredging the main artery but the whole catchment area.
Having regard to the fact that county councils are unable to expend the money on the drainage of our main rivers or their tributaries and having regard particularly to the fact that the Local Authorities (Works) Acts money—which was of inestimable value in doing minor relief work of this kind—is not available, the Parliamentary Secretary will realise that a very grave responsibility rests upon him to proceed with all haste with the arterial drainage of our main rivers and I regard the Suir as being one of the most important rivers in the country.
It must be said, whatever discouraging remarks we might hear about the manner in which the moneys for the Local Authorities (Works) Act were expended, that very valuable work was achieved. It was reflected well in our counties and it eased the rates burden on our people. To suggest otherwise is to reflect upon those people charged with the responsibility of seeing that these moneys were expended wisely and well.
Since the abandonment of the Local Authorities (Works) Act, a void has been created which no county council and no Department of State has been able to fill. If the Parliamentary Secretary feels that the money expended under the Local Authorities (Works) Act was badly spent, uneconomic and wasteful, he ought to consider some other means of helping local authorities to carry out such important works as minor road schemes, minor drainage schemes and such other works as were carried out under the Local Authorities (Works) Act.
My main reason for rising was in relation to arterial drainage. I regard it as of primary importance. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will be able to give me some new hope, some new courage, for our people in relation to the future of the river Suir.
Next in order of importance I regard the role of the Parliamentary Secretary in relation to schools. Many of us are appalled at the terrible conditions under which children are obliged to attend school. There is an awful backlog of work in this regard to be cleared. There is the sorry situation where children are accommodated in very cold, draughty, dilapidated buildings which are nothing better than barns in many parts of the country.
I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary, in conjunction with the Minister for Education, to proceed with all haste to clear up this backlog of work in relation to the provision of new schools, the repair and improvement of so many thousands of others and the extension of so many more.
I observe from the Parliamentary Secretary's speech that perhaps some more works could have been done this year, were it not for the very inclement weather from December to March. I appreciate that. We had that Arctic weather when it was virtually impossible for work schemes of this kind to proceed at all. Nevertheless, in these two important spheres of the Parliamentary Secretary's Department —arterial drainage and schools—there is a vast amount of work to be done and I wish him every success in proceeding with it.
I wish, too, that the Parliamentary Secretary had the responsibility of the heating of these schools as, indeed, he has in relation to Government buildings. The Ceann Comhairle may rule me out of order if I discuss the internal problems of national schools, as such, but there is a lot to be desired in relation to the manner in which these schools are kept—cleaned, heated, adequately lighted and ventilated. I feel much more progress would be made and a more satisfactory situation arrived at in these schools if they became the responsibility of the Parliamentary Secretary in this respect. However, it is his responsibility to keep them and maintain them structurally. I feel he ought to take upon himself the duty of seeing that the repairs which he carries out are maintained and that the schools are adequately heated.
I am pleased, too, that so much progress has been made in relation to the preservation of so many national monuments. I am particularly happy to see progress towards the erection of a monument to our great patriot, Thomas Davis. I look forward to the erection of that monument in the capital city and express the hope that it will be a fitting and worthy monument to him whose ideal was Ireland a nation, united and indivisible. I feel we cannot honour Davis in a satisfactory way until that happy day when we can say with one accord, North and South: Ireland a nation once again.
The Parliamentary Secretary might have interested himself a little more in the work of our National Monuments committees throughout the country. A certain amount of apathy is setting in in many of those committees. Certainly, one of these committees has not met for some considerable time: maybe that is partly my fault. However, many of these committees do not seem to be taking the interest they should in the ruins of churches, castles, moats, old walls and all these things which form part of our ancient heritage and which we should all like to see preserved. I should like to see issued from the Parliamentary Secretary's Department some kind of circular which would have the effect of imbuing a little more enthusiasm in and a greater understanding of the responsibility which devolves upon these bodies in relation to work which they should perform.
I come now to other aspects of the Office of Public Works. Take the improvement of our Garda stations, post offices, agricultural buildings, and such things: there is evidence in all our constituencies of the need to progress in these matters. Many of our Garda stations have a drab and dull appearance. Many of our Gardaí are living under circumstances which we would not tolerate. If we ask men to serve in a force such as the Garda, there is a big responsibility on us to ensure that they are housed in proper circumstances and that attention is given annually, if possible, to these stations so that they are maintained in a proper fashion.
Likewise our post offices. Maybe I would be transgressing the rules of order if I mentioned post offices. While we have a responsibility in relation to post offices proper we seem to have little or no control over sub-post offices. Complaints have been made to me that where the public are obliged to go into sub-post offices where there are obvious structural defects there is a danger of people being injured and I have been told that we have no redress.
If the State asks a person to carry out a function such as that of subpostmaster, I hold that the building should be properly maintained. The public should be adequately safeguarded in entering and leaving the premises for the purpose of doing their business at any post office.
I wish to express my appreciation of the work which the Parliamentary Secretary is doing. He has always been accessible to any Deputy in relation to any matters which we wish to put before him. His courtesy is appreciated, and the good work of the Office is understood by us. If we are critical, it is in a desire to be constructive and to impress upon him the things which we regard as important and which should get priority from an Office such as his.
I express the hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will give an estimate of when work will commence on the drainage of the Suir from its source to the sea.
There are certain matters I want to raise on this Vote, the first of which is one which cannot be unfamiliar to anyone in charge of the Office of Public Works. My query is about the Dromore river in County Monaghan. I understand that the Parliamentary Secretary received representations recently from the Ballybay Chamber of Commerce, pointing out that the farmers in Ballybay are suffering very severely from floods by this river. I know that before we left office in 1955, a survey of the Dromore had been carried out, and an ad interim scheme had been prepared to relieve the urgent problems of flooding associated with that river.
The Dromore river constitutes part of the Erne catchment area. There was some problem about carrying out a comprehensive scheme for the Dromore river, unless and until the authorities in Northern Ireland were prepared to collaborate in a scheme covering the whole catchment area of the Erne. I understand that the Northern Ireland authorities are now prepared to collaborate in the larger scheme, but apparently we are not yet in a position to undertake our part of the larger scheme. There is an ad interim scheme based on the balancing capacity of two small lakes which constitute a feature of the Dromore river, which would substantially relieve the urgent flooding problem in Monaghan. I strongly urge on the Parliamentary Secretary that the Office of Public Works should proceed with that interim scheme which I believe could ultimately be incorporated in the larger permanent arterial drainage operation when it is ultimately undertaken in the Erne catchment as a whole.
The second matter I want to mention relates to a situation close to my own home in North Roscommon. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Lands represents the constituency of Roscommon. He was under pretty heavy pressure from his constituents recently to prevail upon him to get an authoritative statement from the Government as to when they propose to carry out the undertaking which he, the Parliamentary Secretary, had given to his constituents that the Lung river, the Suck and the Boyle would be attended to. The columns of the Roscommon Herald were made to glow with correspondence alleged to have passed between himself and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance, the tenor of the correspondence being that some gargantuan sum was about to be spent on the resolving of the difficulties of the Suck, the Lung and the Boyle. There was great local rejoicing until the correspondence was passed on and it was discovered that it represented nothing more than a pious hope on the part of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance that some fine day, if this work were ever undertaken, it would probably cost something in the order of a quarter of a million pounds.
I want to ask the Parliamentary Secretary to be a little more precise. Can he tell us, within six months, the day on which digging will begin either on the Suck or the Lung? That is a specific question. We are not interested in his aspirations or his pious hopes, however edifying they may be. What I want to know is when the digging that was going on on the Lung river and carried up Lough Gara to the old Lung Bridge, and which was stopped by the Government when they took office, will be resumed and carried on up to the source of the Lung river. The outlet has now been cleared as a result of the lowering of the level of Lough Gara by six feet.
I also want to know when will the physical drainage of the Suck begin which has not been started at all? Allowing the Parliamentary Secretary the widest possible latitude for the uncertainties of life, I think it ought to be possible for him to say categorically within six months when digging may be expected to begin.
Another question I want to raise is a matter to which I have returned on more than one occasion. However, constant dropping wears away stones, and I was greatly encouraged to see recently an inclusion in the Estimate for new works, alterations and additions, that at last a suitable premises is to be built as a remand home for juveniles, I think, in Finglas. That is something I have advocated for a quarter of a century. It is a welcome development to see that it is coming to pass, more especially as I understand that this development is accompanied by an undertaking from the Minister for Education that the new premises will be suitably staffed with properly trained personnel, and due provision will be made for psychiatric treatment and examination of the children committed to the institution.
I am encouraged by the success of the agitation which led to this reform to return to another matter about which I have agitated for a great number of years. This must be one of the few countries in the world of which no aerial survey has been made. It is notorious in archaeological circles that as a result of a variety of historical events, this country must be one of the richest archaeological repositories in the world, and yet it is one of the countries in which the least archaeological survey work has been done.
Thousands of invaluable archaeological remains are being irretrievably lost to us by the ordinary processes of husbandry which are proceeding, and they are being lost because their existence was unknown and impossible to detect through the instrumentality of the old peripatetic survey of the Ordnance Survey. The Ordnance Survey in this country, over the decades in which it has been in operation, has done great work, but the plain fact remains that from the ground, very many important archeological features are impossible to detect. Yet, when the same area is surveyed from the air, there will emerge from the photographic survey an abundance of archaeological information which, without such a survey, is never detected and not infrequently irretrievably lost.
I think I directed the attention of the present Parliamentary Secretary to a striking example of that. When I was Minister for Agriculture and I was urging that such an aerial survey should be made, in order to demonstrate its efficacy for a variety of purposes, I arranged for a restricted aerial survey to be made in the vicinity of Croghan of the Kings in County Roscommon. I had that aerial survey compared with the peripatetic survey of the same area. If my memory serves me right, in the area in question, the peripatetic survey revealed five archaeological sites; the aerial survey revealed about 27 archaeological sites, 22 of which had never before been seen by any archaeologist from at home or abroad.
I believe that that situation obtains in many areas in this country. Of course, Croghan of the Kings is a peculiarly rich archaeological area, being the home of Ailill and Meadhbh and intimately associated with the whole Táin Bó Cuailne and the sagas of that time.
I might find some difficulty in urging on the Government the undertaking of so expensive a thing as an aerial survey, if I had no better reason to urge it than the service of archaeology, though, on balance, if that were the only justification I had, I think the Government would do wisely to invest in such a survey, but such is not the case. Such a survey would provide invaluable information for the purposes of the Agricultural Research Institute. I believe it could be of great value to the Geological Survey and I have little doubt that it would be of very special value to the Ordnance Survey. I think I am right in saying that the 26 Counties, under the jurisdiction of the Government of the Republic, is one of the few parts of the civilised world in respect of which an aerial survey does not exist and it is particularly exasperating to know that such a survey does exist for the Six Counties.
I do urge on the Parliamentary Secretary that this matter should be further reviewed and steps taken to secure that such a survey will be made while many of the archaeological remains that must otherwise perish are still there and can be recorded permanently for posterity and, where necessary, made the subject of preservation orders, pending adequate excavation where it appears that such procedure would be justified.
The third matter I want to raise with the Parliamentary Secretary is something for which he and the Minister for Education would have a certain joint responsibility. There has been over the past ten or 15 years a considerable expansion of the school building programme. Now there are two philosophies of thought. I am speaking now primarily in regard to rural Ireland. One philosophy would suggest that the rural school should cater for a very restricted area in its immediate vicinity. I want to suggest that there is an alternative possibility. Take an average rural parish where there are five to seven one-teacher, two-teacher and three-teacher schools. The fact is that, whatever you may be able to do in the three-teacher school, the accommodation which it is economically and physically practicable to provide in the two-teacher school or the one-teacher school is relatively primitive and there is the added complication that in a one-teacher or two-teacher school, you still have to provide education for the infants, the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth classes.
I want to suggest that we should accept the proposition that the natural social unit in rural Ireland is the parish and that we should experiment at least, where the school manager is prepared to co-operate, with a new departure and, instead of building five schools in one rural parish, should build one good school in the centre of the parish which would be staffed with ten, 12 or 15 teachers, which would have adequate classroom accommodation for each grade in the school, which would have adequate amenities of every kind, which could make provision in due course for the use of television and modern methods of education, which would have adequate playing facilities associated with it, not to speak of adequate sanitary accommodation, and perhaps it is not unthinkable that in some such schools it might be possible where there was a convenient river or something of that kind to provide swimming facilities as part of the general playing accommodation for a school catering for as large a unit as an entire rural parish. Of course, there would have to be provided a bus system to bring the children into the parochial school.
I think it is a good thing that the children of a parish should be all educated together. I think it is a good thing that we should provide schools which would have separate classrooms for each form in the school. I think it is a good thing that we should provide schools that would have an adequate staff of teachers, not only for the advantage of the children but for the academic atmosphere that a school of 12 or 15 teachers provides for the teachers themselves so that in discussion amongst themselves they would keep themselves up-to-date with every modern development of teaching techniques.
I think it is a good thing to have a school to which it is reasonable to suggest that there should be attached recreational facilities which one could not contemplate providing in five or six different centres. I appreciate that at first the organisation of a transport service to the school would present some difficulty but, inasmuch as it is now the practice over the greater part of the world to base primary education on schools to which the children are brought every morning and from which they are brought home every evening, it ought not to be beyond the genius of our people to fit themselves into such an arrangement, if it proves by experiment to result in better educational facilities for the children for whom we are concerned to cater.
I admit that, in order to attempt this, the co-operation of the school manager has to be found but I imagine that, if it were made known to school managers by and large, some would be found who would be prepared to make this experiment; and I believe that, if a few made it, in a very short time, the vast majority would be ready to adopt it. If, however, it is to be done, the sooner the experiment is made the better, because otherwise the expanded programme of school building which has been proceeding for some time will leave us with a multitude of small schools, which experience might teach us should never have been constructed.
There is a provision in this schedule of new works, alterations, and additions, which speaks of the installation in Dáil Éireann of what the Parliamentary Secretary describes as a low-level sound reinforcement system which calls for the installation of a total of 72 microphones mounted on the desks in front of members, with a corresponding number of speaker units to be placed between seats at ear level. I want to go on record as saying that I am strenuously opposed to this proposal. It is a grotesque waste of public money and it will materially subtract from the debating amenities of this House. Anybody who has any experience of this, as I have, at international gatherings will recognise that the installation of these systems is perfectly disastrous to the whole atmosphere of debate. The result is that everybody gets up and bleats into one of these bleeding microphones. The whole atmosphere of give and take, of exchange, intelligent interruption and riposte vanishes and we turn our whole system of debates into a dreary procession of what are popularly called at international gatherings “déclarations”, which means generally taking wads of manuscript out of one's pocket, reading dreary piles of rubbish into these infernal microphones, and then sitting down. As sure as we are a foot high, the next performance will be a recording system and TDs will be getting up here, pouring out their souls, and then running out the back door to get the record to play over to the boys at home the grand speeches they made in Dáil Éireann. I warn the Parliamentary Secretary that if he puts these in, he will, No. 1, waste public money, and, No. 2, destroy the whole atmosphere of this debating chamber and do irreparable damage. That will do no good to anybody. I urge most strenuously on the Parliamentary Secretary and the Government that this should not be done.
In this connection, I want to make an objection in principle. The relationship between Oireachtas Éireann and the Government is one of great delicacy. We have always maintained, since the foundation of the State, that in respect of the amenities of this building, the Government's writ does not run. The authority in Oireachtas Éireann is the Ceann Comhairle for the Dáil and the Cathaoirleach of the Seanad for the Seanad. They are officers of this House, not of the Government. The Government are attempting now to instal this system in this House without the consent of the Opposition. That, I think, is a wholly mistaken procedure. This House has managed to carry on for 40 years, and through much stormier times than we are living in now, with a general atmosphere of give and take in respect of the amenities of this Chamber, which, difficult and all as the situation has been from time to time, has always worked. That atmosphere of give and take has been based on the tacit agreement that no departure will be embarked upon in respect of the House without the consent of the main Parties here represented, and that, in fact, these main Parties, even where they are all agreed, will have regard to any strongly-held views of their colleagues, even though those colleagues do not belong to any particular Party.
I remember when the Parliamentary Secretary was seized with a horrible furore to erect a gallery around the hall outside, because there was some proposal to put the Taoiseach's office up in the passage leading to the Seanad. The Taoiseach, with perfect propriety, referred that matter to us and asked had we any objection. We gave the matter very careful consideration. We felt at first that there were some aesthetic objections but we recognised it was not reasonable that, every time the Taoiseach had to come down to the House, he should have to trot up and down four flights of stairs.
Not only the Taoiseach, but the members of the Press going to the Seanad.
I am not concerned with the Press. I thought then it was perfectly reasonable, if the Taoiseach's office was up in that passage, that due regard should be had for the convenience of the head of the Government, whoever he was, and for that reason, we looked at it again and came to the conclusion that, on the whole, if the thing were done with care and due regard had to the quality of the wrought-iron work, and so on, it would not seriously interfere with the amenities of the existing hall, and we indicated we agreed to it. I understand the work is proceeding. That was the right procedure.
The Parliamentary Secretary had gone at it like a bull in a china shop; he was going to put up the gallery and, if we did not like it, we could lump it. That kind of thing may sometimes be got away with, but it does not work in the long run. If we want a Parliament of this kind to function, we have to maintain this tacit understanding between whoever is in Government and whoever constitute the Opposition, that there will continue, behind all the acrimony of our daily debate, a certain measure of give and take and a certain measure of mutual understanding that, in respect of certain matters, no action will proceed other than on the basis of virtual unanimity.
I want to go on record as saying that we are opposed to this expenditure of public money, not only on the ground that it is an unjustifiable expenditure but also on the ground that we believe it will be a material abridgment of the amenities of this debating chamber. We are of opinion that this project should not be proceeded with and I trust that it will not be proceeded with. I understood these facts were made known to the Parliamentary Secretary and to the Taoiseach. There may have been some misunderstanding. Let there be no further misunderstanding. We are opposed to this. We believe it to be wrong. We believe it to be an unjustifiable expenditure of public money and an improper interference with the amenities of the House, an interference for which there is not that degree of agreement which would justify the Government proceeding with the proposal. We suggest that should be brought to the attention of the Government and a new decision taken in regard to this matter.
I have a certain vicarious interest in the proposal for a memorial to Thomas Davis and the bronze reliefs depicting Young Ireland, and would be grateful if the Parliamentary Secretary could be a little more specific, if it is convenient to do so, particularly with reference to the nature of the bronze reliefs referred to in his statement.
I have also a vicarious interest in the rehabilitation of Kilmainham Jail which has been associated with more periods than one of our history. Is it intended that the place of confinement of those who have gone before us should be commemorated? Parnell was there, as was my father and William O'Brien, Davitt and a number of others. It is hard to know where to draw the line in these matters but it was from Kilmainham Jail that the No Rent Manifesto was issued and these are matters which are of interest to many of us.
It may interest Deputies to know that the letter authorising the issue of the No Rent Manifesto which Parnell wrote in 1881 was ultimately delivered in 1926 and I happened to be present when it was delivered. It was rather a strange thing because when it was delivered into my father's hands, the Lord have mercy on them all, there happened to be sitting with us Parnell's private secretary and in 1926 when that letter addressed to my father was handed in to our house and the query was: “Whose writing is that?” and he replied: “That is Parnell's writing.” The seal was then broken and the letter was a letter addressed by Parnell to my father from Kilmainham Jail authorising him to issue the No Rent Manifesto.
What actually happened, of course, was that by the time the friendly warder who had acted as messenger, reached my father's house with Parnell's letter, my father was himself arrested and in Kilmainham Jail, so the letter was not delivered in 1881. It was thrown in a drawer and it fell down behind it and when articles of furniture came to be auctioned and when in preparation for the auction, the drawer was taken out the letter was found addressed to our house in George's Street and 45 years after it had been written, it was faithfully delivered with the seal unbroken to the man to whom it was originally addressed. Bearing in mind the precious association of Kilmainham Jail with the Land War, it would be seemly that, in addition to that of the later public servants of this country, the presence of Parnell and his colleagues in that venerable institution be appropriately commemorated.
If the Parliamentary Secretary has any further information he can conveniently give us in regard to these matters, I should be glad to have it. I should be particularly interested to hear what he proposes to do on the Dromore river and very particularly intrigued to hear when will digging begin on the Lung and Suck Rivers.
The Office of Public Works is responsible for the acquisition and building of sites for Garda barracks and my complaint is in respect of the time it takes the Office to make up their minds regarding the acquisition of sites. There are a few areas in my constituency where some ten to 15 years ago it was decided to erect Garda barracks. In one case they have succeeded in getting a site but in two other cases it has taken ten to 12 years to secure a site. The Office of Public Works could take a leaf out of the book of the school managers who are able to secure a site in a very short space of time to allow the Office of Public Works to proceed at an ever-increasing rate in the building of schools.
One of the areas I am concerned with is the village of Ashford where there is a very important Garda station on the main Dublin-Wexford road. Some ten years ago, they had practically purchased the site and yet they have not succeeded in acquiring one. I do not know what progress has been made in recent weeks but certainly up to a fortnight ago, no effort had been made to acquire it and get on with the building of the Garda barracks. The station there at the moment is no credit to the Office of Public Works and I sincerely hope that something will be done about that position.
Again in my native village some years ago, it was decided to build a Garda barracks and they were so long about acquiring a site that in the meantime some private person came in. Now if they want the site, they must pay £300 or £400 more for three-quarters of an acre than they would have to pay if they went about the job three or four years ago. If they do succeed in acquiring a site for the building of the Garda barracks, there is another matter that tends to put the question of building on the long finger and we have had some experience of this in my own constituency. We find that if the Garda barracks is situated a distance from a water supply, the local authority is expected to provide a main on to the site for the barracks. It would not be unreasonable to expect the contractor to bring down the water supply from the main. It should be a taxpayers' rather than a ratepayers' job. It is not reasonable to expect the local authority to do it. They refused to do it in the case to which I have referred and it was responsible for holding up the building for nearly 12 months. There was a similar hold-up in regard to the Garda barracks at Rathdrum because the local authority did not regard it as their responsibility. I hope in future this will be made the responsibility of the Board of Works and that they will pay for it.
I am delighted the Parliamentary Secretary can report an increase in the number of contracts accepted for the building of rural schools. There are many schools in my constituency that require replacement. The least we can do in 1963 is to provide our school-going children with proper accommodation. I understand that the new designs will help to reduce the building time by some 30 per cent and that is a wonderful achievement because my big complaint is that there was too great a time-lag between the signing of the contract in the first instance and the handing over of the key to the manager when the job was completed.
It often took from 12 to 18 months to get even a two-roomed school built in rural Ireland. It was not uncommon to see a contractor complete a job except for the painting of, say, the entrance door, then going off and coming back in six months to finish it. I had such a case recently in my area where a school was almost completed. The contractor left the site for four or five months before returning to do a minor job which involved a week's work for a carpenter. That structure could have been handed over much sooner. However, there seems to be an improvement and I wish the Parliamentary Secretary every success in his efforts to expedite school building.
In connection with drainage, I should like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary to consider a scheme put forward some time ago by the residents of the Kilcoole district. It would come under intermediate rivers. His predecessor included it in the first areas to be surveyed under that scheme but it was found to be very expensive and the Office of Public Works were not prepared to proceed with it then. When the present Parliamentary Secretary took office, the matter was again raised with him without much success. On this occasion I again ask him to consider that area for inclusion in intermediate schemes in the very near future.
It was suggested that it could be done in two phases and even if it were not all done at one time, we would settle for half at a time. In acceding to this request, the Parliamentary Secretary would be helping to relieve flooding in a part of County Wicklow where the farmers for most of the year are deprived of their land, which is some of the most highly valued land in the country. The farmers pay substantial rates and this is bad enough without being deprived of the use of the land as well.
In connection with harbours, or rather the dredging of harbours, I am a member of the Arklow Harbour Board and we have an annual problem there about dredging. We have to go to the Office of Public Works for their dredger or get one elsewhere. This must be done once or twice a year and costs quite a lot of money. Our main complaint about the Board of Works dredger is in regard to payment. Before we get the dredger at all, we have to send a cheque for the full amount of the estimated time the dredger will be engaged there and when she is on the site, we must maintain the crew and pay certain other overheads, whether the boat is working or not. We get about 44 per cent of actual working time while she is in the harbour. The Harbour Board in Arklow are in a bad financial position which is made more difficult because of this situation.
In view of the importance of Arklow harbour, I do not see why special consideration should not be given to it and a reduced rate fixed for dredging there. Some 18 months ago, we were in the extraordinary position that the harbour needed dredging and the board had no money. The Board of Works dredger— fortunately—was not available as, if she had been, we would have had to take her and apply to, perhaps, the Minister for Transport and Power for assistance——
God help you if you had to go to that Minister.
Fortunately, the dredger was not available and we had to go to Drogheda to get a dredger from the harbour board there on very much better terms. They gave us time to pay and that saved the situation. I do not think Arklow Harbour Board, if they had money, would have any serious objection to paying, but whether or not they have it, they are expected to pay through the nose for the Board of Works dredger. Dredging is left to the last moment because we know the financial commitments we must face.
Wicklow Harbour Commissioners feel the same way, as they informed me some time ago, but they succeeded in getting a very substantial loan which may help to alleviate their problem. In the case of Arklow, the problem is likely to remain for some time, although we have a proposal for the Board of Works that may offer a solution to our dredging problem. I shall not go into it now because I hope it will be dealt with in the conference room. Whether we succeed with that scheme or not, it is almost certain we will need the dredger in future and I hope we will find the Office of Public Works more accommodating.
I congratulate the Parliamentary Secretary on his success in this office and I wish him many years there. I know that because of his experience as a professional man, he will bring about the changes necessary to expedite the building of schools and Garda barracks and make progress with drainage that has been, perhaps, put on the long finger over the years. While I do not wish to suggest any reason why he should not be promoted, I hope he will be many years longer in the Board of Works so that he can achieve an even greater success than he has done in the past 18 months.
I find it difficult, entering the debate at this late stage, to say something that has not already been said but we must consider some particular matters which require ventilation. I was in touch with the Parliamentary Secretary already in regard to one of these and I regret that having examined it, he could not see his way to come to our assistance, that is, in regard to the preservation of Dundaniel Castle on the Bandon River as one travels from Cork city to West Cork. This is a lovely stretch of river in one of the most beautiful parts of the country. And here is this historic pile. Now there is a split in the wall which is rapidly widening and those interested in the appearance of the locality and in the history attached to this castle are particularly perturbed that it may not much longer withstand the ravages of time.
I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to look at this matter again and do something to retain this castle which marks the first stand made by Owen Roe O'Sullivan on a very historic occasion in the history of the country. For that reason alone, it is deserving of consideration in order to guarantee its survival for some years to come.
I regret that this Office has been saddled with all the country's drainage problems. The Local Authorities (Works) Act is still in suspension and there was no indication in the budgetary provisions that the Government have any inclination to resume operations under that Act. The intermediate scheme has not operated as a substitute for it. It is regrettable that with all the other obligations thrown on the Board of Works, they also have to undertake drainage of a minor character, which could be dealt with under the machinery which operated so successfully in its time in regard to the clearance of so many of our smaller streams and rivers.
As regards major drainage, I should like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary to inquire sympathetically into the position of the Owenabue River, which presents a serious flooding problem between Carrigaline and Upton.
Carraigdhoun.
Unfortunately, the water is brown too often. There is a lot of valuable land from which people cannot derive a livelihood because of the danger of flooding.
I should like to refer to the drabness of many of our Garda stations and the necessity in particular of making the living quarters of single Gardaí more pleasant. Too many of our stations present a barrack-like appearance—that barrack-like appearance that detracts from so many of our public buildings. These buildings are frequented on occasion by visitors to our country. Those of us who have had occasion to visit abroad know how we are influenced by the condition of public buildings as we see them in those countries. We can expect therefore that visitors to our shores will be influenced by the tidiness and bright appearance of the public institutions under the care of the Government. I hope that in the coming year something more will be done to brighten and improve the appearance of Garda stations.
Regarding the school building programme, the Parliamentary Secretary's reference to more effective designs for the smaller schools has been welcomed by practically everybody who spoke. However, I do not find any reference in his statement to any change in the proposals concerning the erection of larger schools in urban areas. As Deputy Dillon remarked, it is unfortunately true that too many of our country schools have been denuded of pupils, who are being catered for by the transport system. However, the reverse operates in other places. Because of the trend towards the cities, problems are presented and aggravated by the movement of people from the centre of the cities to the suburbs.
In that part of the city of Cork in my constituency, I find chaotic conditions regarding the erection of schools in the Douglas and Blackrock areas. The schools being erected appear to be completely inadequate in size. In one instance, a five-roomed school has been built, and the staff already numbers six teachers. Hundreds of new houses are in the course of erection there. In another case, a three-roomed school has been built to cater for a rapidly expanding area which obviously required a school of at least eight classrooms. All future building in the city and suburbs should have at least eight classrooms. It is regrettable to have the situation that children are refused education at the age at which they would wish to attend school because they cannot be accommodated in these suburban schools. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to examine this situation in conjunction with the Minister for Education and if possible, even where schools are under construction, to take action to solve the problems parents have to contend with. I need not emphasise the danger attendant on infant pupils being required to travel distances to school.
That would be a matter for the Minister for Education rather than the Parliamentary Secretary.
I agree. I assume, however, there is collaboration between the Department of Education and the Board of Works regarding the type of building that should be erected in such circumstances. As the Parliamentary Secretary included in his statement a reference to the smaller schools, I felt I could avail of this opportunity to bring this particular problem to his attention. I would ask him to ensure that in any plans being prepared for the erection of schools in the future, they will be built sufficiently large not only to cater for the needs of the existing population in the area, but to take into account the development of housing estates and so on and that there will be sufficient accommodation to allow individual teacher attention, so necessary if pupils are to benefit from the best primary education.
As the other points regarding the administration of the Parliamentary Secretary's Office have been dealt with in such detail, I do not wish to delay his reply to the debate.
It would not be possible for me at this hour to reply to all the points raised by Deputies. I propose, therefore, to report progress and continue to-morrow. It is such an important sector of the Government that I feel I should be in a position to answer as far as possible the points raised. However, in deference to the Leader of the Opposition, Deputy Dillon, I should like to refer to a point raised by him concerning the acoustics of this House. Deputy Dillon has not got his facts correct. I should say at the outset that this time last year, indeed during the debate on this Estimate, representations were made to have steps taken to improve the faulty acoustics, and every member of the House knows, every member of the Press Gallery knows, and indeed people who frequent the Public Gallery know, that it is almost impossible to hear many of the speakers.
It has been suggested some Ministers and speakers on the Opposition front benches do not speak sufficiently clearly. That may well be. Nevertheless, on an occasion such as this, with an almost empty House, we find it is quite easy to hear what is being said. If we cast our minds back to important debates such as that on the Budget, on the other hand, we will recall that it is almost impossible to hear a speaker who generally speaks out and articulates clearly. There are other sections of this House, where I usually sit, for instance, on the second bench, where it is very difficult to hear anyone.
To go back to the point raised by Deputy Dillon, there was no question of rushing into this decision like a bull in a china shop. He suggested that the decision regarding a connecting corridor between the level of this House and the Seanad had been rushed into. That is not so. When I took over, I had a look at the plans for Leinster House and in certain respects I disagreed with them. I submitted suggestions which I deemed to be improvements and these were submitted to the Ceann Comhairle and to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. They were there approved, but Fine Gael held up the work on that passageway. Eventually, however, they agreed.
On this problem of faulty acoustics, the procedure adopted by my Office was that we submitted our proposals to the Ceann Comhairle. As Deputy Dillon rightly remarked, the Ceann Comhairle is independent of the Government Party and of any of the Opposition Parties. He is an officer of this House, completely divorced from the members of the Oireachtas. He is responsible for the administration of the House, and his approval must be obtained. We obtained that permission long ago and out of courtesy, we submitted the proposals with regard to this microphone and loudspeaker system to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
Has that Committee no other function beyond that of courtesy?
The Deputy knows the answer to that one very well. As a result of correspondence between that Committee and my Office, a demonstration was arranged here. Deputy Dillon did not come to that demonstration of how the microphone and loudspeaker unit worked. We then put in these acoustic tiles and this curtain. The acoustics now are worse than they were before we put these things up. They, however, are only an adjunct to the further reinforcement system which we propose to instal. Our proposal is not for a loudspeaker system as such. We do not propose that Deputies should go to a dispatch box and talk into a microphone. I do not go to the front bench where there is a microphone between each two benches, lean over and speak into it. There is no need for that.
The proposal is that there will be a control panel operated by a permanent employee of the House. The overall control will be in the hands of the Ceann Comhairle, of course, but this man will operate a control panel and he will be responsible for grading the sound. If, for instance, a Deputy in the third row is speaking, the man at the panel will increase the sensitivity of the microphone nearest the speaker. There will be no question of a Deputy having to leave his seat and go to a dispatch box to speak. At the back there will be a small loudspeaker and the Deputy sitting near it may switch it off or on as he needs. In that way, if he is hard of hearing, he can hear what is being said.
I can assure the House that every consideration was given to this measure before it was finally decided on. We employed a very eminent consultant, specifically to advise my Office on this proposition. This consultant visited many national parliaments, the British House of Commons and many of the larger local authorities and advised us accordingly. We considered various measures, among them being whether to instal the suspended microphone system. I regret Deputy Dillon has not got a grasp of what is envisaged. I am sure he will be the first to admit, when he sees these things in operation, that we are correct.
A meeting was arranged in the Taoiseach's Office at which the Taoiseach, a representative of Fine Gael and of Labour and I were present. The entire proposal was explained by both the Taoiseach and myself and the result was that the Labour Party, who had at first objected to the proposition, wrote to the Taoiseach withdrawing their objection. There was never a question, as Deputy Dillon suggested, of any discourtesy to any Opposition Party.
May I repeat that we got the approval of the Ceann Comhairle, that we got the approval of the Government, that we got the approval of the Labour Party? The Fine Gael Party still seem to be of opinion that the proposition is a retrograde one which would undermine the type of traditional debate, the parry and thrust of debate, which we have known here down the years. That is the fear of Deputy Dillon. If that were correct, Deputy Dillon would have been quite right in objecting. I hope, following this further explanation, he will agree that perhaps he is condemning the proposal out of hand. I would again assure both Deputy Dillon and Deputy Sweetman that we are not bringing in any tape recorders here or bringing in microphones to which Deputies must go and speak into. We can carry on speaking just as we speak now. There will be an operator in the control panel whose duty it will be to grade the sensitivity. Each speaker's voice varies. Deputy O'Sullivan speaks loudly and of course Deputy Sherwin would not need a microphone at all.
What, in the name of heavens, will we do with Deputy Corry?
Switch it off altogether.
The control panel operator will be able to control the sound.
