Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 22 Nov 1967

Vol. 231 No. 4

Committee on Finance. - Vote 8—Public Works and Buildings (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:
That the Vote be referred back for reconsideration.
—(Deputy Harte).

On Thursday I was pointing to the inability of the Government to deal with our drainage problems west of the Shannon. I dealt with the Government's promises to drain the Shannon some years ago and their failure to carry this out when the Roscommon by-election was over. I also dealt with the proposed drainage of the Suck which has not been carried out and I doubt very much if it will be carried out under this Government. I was just about to deal with the board which operates as between Roscommon and Galway, the joint drainage board for the Suck. In recent years, this board has spent a certain amount of money on the upkeep of the river. The thing that strikes one is that it is only in winter that they carry out any work on the river and many people who work on that drainage scheme in wintertime tell me that all they do is go around in boats cutting rushes. I suppose it is better to have them doing that than to have them sitting at home getting the Government subsidy for doing nothing. This is a very serious problem for people in the West, particularly small farmers, and I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary, if he can, to bring the drainage of the Suck nearer to the top of the list of priorities.

I should like to see some kind of permanency being instituted for those who work in the Board of Works, particularly those in skilled occupations. There seems to be no permanency at present, and it would be in the Board's interests to have that permanency and it would prove a greater incentive for people to work for the Board. During the past year, the Board of Works dealt with minor employment schemes, rural improvements schemes and bog development schemes and next year this work will be done by the Department of Local Government and the county councils. I welcome this move, for the simple reason that last year the Board of Works were completely inactive in Galway as far as these schemes were concerned. I do not know what amount of money was spent over the past ten years, but in Galway last year the amount was very small indeed.

I suggest to the Board of Works, and to other Government Departments, that as there are many people in County Galway receiving the dole, because the Government cannot offer them employment, it would be better, rather than to give them between 52s 6d and £9 a week for doing nothing, if the Board of Works were to put into operation some of these minor employment schemes, rural improvements schemes or bog development schemes, and to give these people jobs on them. That would be a lot more sensible than the present system.

Reading through the Parliamentary Secretary's speech, I see that he says the Boyne scheme will be on exhibition shortly and that he hopes that the Maigue will follow soon. He goes on to say:

As the preparatory work on these schemes finishes, technical and other staff will be freed to accelerate the other schemes in preparation, namely, the Corrib-Mask, the Erne, the Suir, the Mulkear, the Boyne, the Owenmore, the Bonet, the Dunkellin and the Lavally.

It is the Dunkellin and the Lavally scheme in which I am interested and I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will give these schemes a push. If that were done, it would be a great help to the farming community. Further down, he mentions that works are in progress on the Moy, the Deel, the Corrib-Headford and on the Killimor-Cappagh. I am most interested in the latter scheme which has just begun. I have asked the Parliamentary Secretary many questions during my three years here as to when work on this scheme will begin and on each occasion he said it would begin in the new financial year. The beginning of the financial year coincided with the county council elections. I am delighted this scheme began, but I object to the fact that it was opened one week before the county council elections to flog the last ounce of political benefit out of it and for no other reason. Were it not for the county council elections, it would have gone on to the next financial year.

It will drain the land as well. I am sorry the Deputy is not pleased at the fact that it did start.

I am highly pleased. Were it not for the fact that the Fianna Fáil Government came back into office in 1957, it would be completed by now. It was pegged prior to 1957, but when the Fianna Fáil Government came into office, they stopped work on the Corrib drainage, which included this part of the Headford scheme.

That is not true and well the Deputy knows it.

It is true, but there is not much point in having an argument with the Parliamentary Secretary.

The Deputy would not win.

The people of Headford realise the position. When they get the chance, they will give their answer, as they always have done in the past.

Regarding this drainage scheme, there is one part of it in a district called Turloughcor, where work was about to start last September. But, suddenly, an order came from a person or persons unknown that work was not to proceed with this part of the scheme. The work would have drained approximately 700 acres, 350 acres in commonage and the rest belonging to small farmers. About 50 small formers are concerned. It has been stated by a person or persons unknown that if this area were drained it would affect the wild fowl life there. Was it the Parliamentary Secretary gave the order to stop that work? I presume he did. Who in authority asked you——

Asked the Parliamentary Secretary.

I am addressing all my remarks through the Chair to the Parliamentary Secretary. Somebody in authority asked the Parliamentary Secretary to stop the drainage of this river. Yet we had local Fianna Fáil councillors saying it should be drained while their representatives here, Ministers or Parliamentary Secretaries, stopped the scheme.

It was stated at one stage that it was the gun clubs in the district who objected to it. It was not. I have been in contact with them and they say it would be of much benefit to them if the river were drained. I have tried to contact the Wild Fowl Protection Society, who, I believe, are under the Department of Lands. I have failed to get an answer from them as to whether or not it was they who stopped it. I believe it was. If they are looking for a wild fowl sanctuary, Lough Corrib is about half a mile from here. It is an area of 68 square miles and there are 365 islands in it. That should provide bird sanctuary acceptable to any wild fowl society.

I am asking the Parliamentary Secretary on behalf of the people in that district to issue an order that work go ahead on this scheme. If it is being by-passed now, when will it be done? Will it ever be done? It should be started now. A few years ago I made representations to the Minister for Lands regarding the Keirnaun estate in that district. I asked him to acquire it for division among needy tenants. It was not acquired. It was bought by a professional man from Mayo and not divided among the people on whose behalf I speak now and who would benefit by the drainage of the Turloughcor. On that occasion it was felt by everybody in the district that the land should have been acquired. Is the same interest being served now by the fact that you are keeping this land as a bird sanctuary? I have a feeling it is, but I cannot get proof of it.

Everybody is talking now about the plight of the small farmer. Deputies over there make the case that suits them best, but I am making a case for the small farmers in this district. It is necessary that this drainage be carried out for their good, and I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary that work be resumed. I could say many more things, but I feel they would be better left unsaid. The work would have been carried out now but for the change of Government in 1957. However, that was the will of the people and we accept it.

I will conclude as I began. A sum of £5 million out of this Estimate of £9,174,000 is being spent on a dole in the City of Dublin and the rest in bits and pieces all over the country. Is it not the duty of the Government to give the opportunity to every individual to earn a living rather than the present system whereby he is paid a few paltry pounds a week and slowly loses his independence? It is a shame that only £4 million is being spent in the rest of the country and £5 million in Dublin.

I should like to comment on a few matters mentioned by the Parliamentary Secretary. I note that an extra £900,000 is to be spent this year. This, in itself, is a good thing and an achievement in a way. I also note it is mentioned that the Special Employment Schemes Office is transferred from the Office of Public Works. I am disappointed in a way that this scheme was taken out of the control of the Parliamentary Secretary's Office and the Department of Finance. Down in Kerry, at any rate, we got some very good and useful schemes under way through the Office of Public Works and the Special Employment Schemes Office. Last year approximately £28,000 was spent in County Kerry on these schemes which covered small drainage schemes and the improvement of many private roads and also provided much useful employment during the winter. The proof as to how much these schemes were appreciated in Kerry is the extent to which they were availed of there. The small farmers were prepared to contribute towards the cost of these schemes when given any opportunity to do so.

It is a great achievement to have 842 new primary schools provided in the course of ten years or, as the Parliamentary Secretary has said, close on three every fortnight. I also welcome the fact that proposals to develop landing places at various points along the coast were examined by the Office of Public Works at the request of the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries during the year. I know recommendations were made to the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries and that schemes were carried out in one or two locations in South Kerry. However, I should like very much if more attention could be given to some smaller areas and the smaller piers such as Waterville, Bealtra, Castlecove, Westcove and Banatra. I have no doubt there would be a vast improvement in the fishing industry there if adequate landing facilities were provided. I am very hopeful that more will be done in this regard in the coming year.

We in Kerry are very grateful to the Office of Public Works for the great job which they did on the home of the Liberator, Daniel O'Connell, at Derrynane. The Office of Public Works carried out some beautiful work on this home. This should now be a great tourist attraction and should attract many visitors from abroad.

There is a substantial increase in the Estimate for 1967-68 in relation to rents, rates, et cetera, on premises occupied by the Civil Service. It is unfortunate that accommodation is so costly in Dublin and that many of the civil servants have to work in unhealthy and congested conditions. I would suggest that the Parliamentary Secretary should consider sending portion of his Department south where they would have plenty of fresh air and healthy working conditions.

I welcome, in particular, the proposal to increase the estimate for surveys from £22,000 to £50,000. I believe one could not carry out half enough surveys. Without surveying there is no point in making further plans. I welcome the fact that the Office of Public Works has done so much in relation to coast protection; it is noted that six locations have been planned. I should like to mention Waterville in South Kerry which is very seriously affected by coast erosion. It is probably one of the worst areas in which the land is being eaten away, and very soon the county council will have to spend a considerable amount of money on the roads unless something is done to prevent this coast erosion.

It is also gratifying to note that much more archaeological investigations are being carried out. I would ask the Office of Public Works to work closely with the county development teams in the counties where they have these teams in relation to the carrying out of these investigations. In some counties the teams have set up subcommittees to deal specifically with these investigations and I am sure that by contacting the secretaries of these teams the Office of Public Works would get some very useful information.

I have been puzzled from time to time on a few points relating to the operation and maintenance of drainage schemes which were carried out by the Office of Public Works. I should like to know the real reason why the maintenance of these schemes is a charge on the rates as a county-at-large charge and why it is not borne, or at least a percentage of it, by the State. There are good reasons for and against; I should like to hear the good reasons for.

In relation to main drainage schemes, a lot of spoil was left on the banks of the river. This covered up much ground and rendered quite a few acres useless. I should like to know whether there is anything to prevent the Board of Works from clearing away this debris or from spreading it more evenly over the land or removing it to parts of the land where it could be used effectively.

As regards the four parks which are under the control of the Commissioner of Public Works, I should like to take this opportunity of thanking the Parliamentary Secretary for the manner in which he obtained sanction from the Minister for Local Government to get An Foras Forbartha to employ a firm of consultants to carry out a detailed survey and to make recommendations in relation to the Bourn Vincent Memorial Park in Killarney and to the Killarney valley as a whole. This report set out very clearly most of the problems facing the Government and the country in relation to the development of the Bourn Vincent Memorial Park, and Killarney in general which means so much to the national economy and the country from the tourist point of view.

I strongly recommend to the Parliamentary Secretary that a special parks section should be set up in the Office of Public Works as a matter of urgency to study this report, to carry out further investigations, and to bring at least some of its recommendations into operation. This section could not be set up half soon enough. I should also like to congratulate the Parliamentary Secretary on the courageous step he took in removing the sheep from the Bourn Vincent Memorial Park when it was considered that that was the right thing to do, having regard to the fact that the primary purpose of this park is to provide recreational facilities for the local people, for tourists and for the nation as a whole, and that the park should not be developed primarily as an agricultural centre.

I should also like to recommend that a biological field section should be established in that park. It would be an ideal centre because there are various species of flower, fauna, trees and shrubs in the park. I should not like this park to be developed exclusively for tourist or recreational purposes. I think a model farm should be developed there where there is prime land, well sheltered, well fenced, well watered and a magnificent farmyard and staff. A model farm could well be developed there and it would be an attraction in its own right. It would also form a very important part of a national park. I am very keen on model farms and I recommended this in my speech on the Estimate for the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, and also my speech on the Budget. I think a model farm in every county would be very desirable. There is an opportunity now to develop a model farm as part of this national park.

I should also like to know from the Parliamentary Secretary whether there have been any developments in the proposal to erect a cable car system from Torc Waterfall to Mangerton Mountain. There has been much interest in this proposal and, if it is intended to go ahead with it, will the Parliamentary Secretary say if he is satisfied that it would be in the best interests of the district and the country as a whole that this type of development should take place in an area of high amenity?

I strongly recommend that the Bourn Vincent Memorial Park should be developed as a national park and extended and that the special park section which should be set up in the Office of Public Works should investigate the scope and extension of this development. Here there is a vast area of mountains and waste land. There are also some beautiful valleys and hills. It would also be worth while investigating the possibility of bringing the major portion of the land into public ownership. The owners of the major portion of the land might be quite pleased to have it taken over by the State on condition that they would get employment in the park when it is developed. I can visualise a huge park extending through Kilgarvan into Kenmare, along by Sneem through the mountains into Waterville and through Glenflesk, Shrone, and the beautiful Clydagh Valley, into Cork county, linking up with the State forest at Gloundar.

I should also like to know whether forestry fits into the future plans in relation to the development of the Bourn Vincent Memorial Park and the estate in general. I should like to know whether the forestry division are still expanding and continuing——

I do not want to interrupt the Deputy but he is enlarging the debate. The Parliamentary Secretary is not responsible for forestry.

It comes within the scope of the Bourn Vincent Memorial Park.

As long as the Deputy keeps to that.

In the park itself 3,500 acres are being used by the forestry division for afforestation. I should just like to know whether they intend to continue on a purely commercial basis, or whether they are to embark on some amenity planting.

I will conclude by asking the Parliamentary Secretary and the Office of Public Works to give priority to the development of this national park, to bear in mind the value of Killarney and Kerry to the Irish economy, to give it primary consideration in deciding what form its future development will take, and to take into consideration the fact that 60 per cent of the foreigners who come to this country every year come with the intention of visiting Killarney and that about 50 per cent see most of south Kerry on their tour of the country.

I want to thank the Parliamentary Secretary and the Office of Public Works, both the indoor and the outdoor staff, for their co-operation during the past year. By and large, the people of south Kerry are very well satisfied with the way they have operated, and they will probably be more satisfied if they push ahead vigorously with a plan for the development of a national park in Killarney and south Kerry.

This debate on the Office of Public Works will undoubtedly give the Parliamentary Secretary in charge an opportunity of explaining to the House, and indeed to the country, where his priorities lie in spending the money allocated to him in this Estimate and indeed in all his annual Estimates. The Office of Public Works covers a wide field and a great variety but the main responsibility of that Department must be implementing the legislation passed by this House. In my opinion the main legislation passed in relation to the Office of Public Works is the Arterial Drainage Act. I feel that the Office of Public Works are handling the whole question of arterial drainage in what can be described as a piece-meal way.

A very satisfactory drainage job was carried out on the Brosna river in County Offaly. Other major rivers followed, including the Corrib, and some time next year we are to commence a comprehensive drainage scheme on the river Boyne. This drainage scheme on the Boyne is long overdue. I am very glad that at least a start has been made. I presume that to drain the Boyne from outside Edenderry to Drogheda will take a long time but the drainage of the Boyne has been the subject of agitation for many years. I feel that the drainage of the Boyne will be a great asset to the landowners whose lands adjoin it.

I should like to hear from the Parliamentary Secretary what has happened to the river Nore. Repeated requests have been made over the years by the county councils concerned, all of whom have been asking that some steps be taken to carry out a comprehensive scheme from where the Nore rises in County Laois, down to the city of Kilkenny, through Thomastown and from there to the point where it joins the Suir and the Barrow. The river Nore, in my opinion, has been responsible for the flooding of thousands of acres of land and unless some practical steps are taken to relieve the landowners whose holdings are adjacent to the river Nore they will be in a very serious plight.

We all understand that it is not possible to have all those major drainage schemes in operation at the one time but surely it is not outside the bounds of possibility for the Office of Public Works to carry out in these areas some minor drainage works in preparation for the major drainage schemes. I have seen in parts of the river Nore huge trunks of trees resting in the bed of the river. I have seen the eyes of the bridges blocked, preventing the flow of water. Surely, pending the carrying out of a comprehensive scheme, it should be possible for the Office of Public Works to set up a new section for the purpose of seeing that at least there is a steady flow of water and that all obstructions are removed, such obstructions as trunks of trees and blocked eyes of bridges.

The local authorities have no power. The Local Authorities (Works) Act has been scrapped. There is no legal obligation on a local authority to carry out the works and when complaints are made regarding the carrying out of those important drainage schemes we are told that nothing can be done until the comprehensive drainage scheme is carried out. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to consider seriously the problems not alone in relation to the river Nore but also in relation to the Barrow where there are similar problems. By the time the Boyne and the Nore schemes have been concluded it will be time to carry out a comprehensive scheme again on the river Barrow because there are parts of the Barrow which were never attended to. Every winter there is very serious flooding of all lands in the Barrow valley. The Nore valley stretches from Mountrath in County Laois to Durrow and from that to Thomastown. Surely there must be an obligation on some State Department to take the necessary steps to see that farmers' lands are clear of water. I feel that a substantial sum of money should be provided each year for the carrying out of those works pending the main drainage scheme.

The Barrow Drainage Board which is responsible for the maintenance of the river is a board comprised of representatives of the county councils and others whose functions are very tied up and very limited under regulations. According to the law, the Barrow Drainage Board can only maintain the river in exactly the same condition as they found it when it was handed over to them by the Office of Public Works. No works can be carried out in any circumstances. The river banks can be swept away; the walls and the parapets of bridges can deteriorate with time and age and be knocked down. The county councils have no authority. The Board of Works will not permit certain works to be done and the Barrow Drainage Board cannot carry out improvements because these cannot be described in Office of Public Works language as maintenance work.

I feel the Parliamentary Secretary's Office should be in a position to bring about a greater measure of relief in relation to drainage because they are the only State Department responsible for drainage. Everybody knows that with the present very high rate of unemployment in rural Ireland the one scheme which will render a benefit to the landowners and provide local employment is drainage. I have never seen a drainage scheme yet, which could be described as a satisfactory scheme, which did not provide useful employment and leave the lands which were drained much better than they were before the scheme was executed. Therefore, I feel the time has come for a complete and entire reorganisation of the Office of Public Works in relation to drainage.

Deputy Donnellan referred to the drainage of the Shannon. When the drainage of the Shannon is likely to take place, I cannot tell or what proposals the Office of Public Works have in mind for the drainage of the Shannon, but there is one thing we do know, that is, that the drainage of the Shannon presents many unusual problems. Numerous promises have been made from time to time, promises of a very sincere character at the time, and, perhaps those who gave the undertakings and the promises were not without the knowledge that those works were not going to be hastily executed. What is the position in Roscommon and in the district of County Offaly from Shannonbridge right down to the district in the parish of Lusmagh known as the Angler's Rest, where we have continuous flooding every year? The lands were there are useless for eight to nine months every year. The landowners are obliged to pay heavy rates and in many instances they cannot put stock on the land because they are afraid of fluke. Fluke, as we know, comes from wet and waterlogged lands.

Again, we see that in the Shannon Valley there have been widespread losses from time to time. I have often thought on every occasion on which we have serious flooding in the Shannon that we have the Government reaching a state of panic to see what temporary measures of relief can be provided. I suggested many years ago, and I think the suggestion is on the records of the Office of Public Works, that a permanent committee be set up to deal with emergencies relating to the Shannon, comprising the counties of Offaly, Westmeath, Roscommon, Leitrim and Longford—all the counties which are flooded.

I do not know how long it will be before a comprehensive drainage scheme is carried out on the Shannon. I hope I am not foolish enough to presume it will be in the lifetime of the youngest member of this House, on the progress that has been made over the years. I would like to suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that, when the survey of the Shannon is in progress in his Department, he consider at the same time as the drainage is actually undertaken, either by the Office of Public Works or by the Forestry Department, some extensive plantation along the Shannon Valley. There is quite an amount of land in the Shannon Valley which is suitable only for plantation. If there were co-operations between the Office of Public Works and the Forestry Department, a good deal of the unpleasantness which is experienced in the Shannon Valley from flooding could be eliminated. This unpleasantness would be avoided for future generations if good planting were undertaken. I am sure that before the Parliamentary Secretary delivers the last word on this Estimate, he will make some reference to the drainage of the Shannon. It will not be sufficient for him to repeat the promises that have been made over the years in regard to it. We would like to know exactly where we stand, whether it will be done or not.

I sincerely recommend that a section of the Parliamentary Secretary's Office be established to deal with minor drainage works that do not come within the scope of the arterial drainage programme but which are qualified for inclusion in catchments under the arterial drainage works as soon as steps are undertaken to do this work. Steps must be taken to drain the land of this country. The Parliamentary Secretary knows, and again it is on the record, that one of the priorities of the inter-Party Government, so long decried by the present Government, was drainage, because we believed in drainage. We believed that the money spent on drainage was money well spent, that the more you employed on drainage, the more work you were providing and the more you improved the land of Ireland, the better the yield. We believed that any money spent on drainage was a sound national investment.

The Office of Public Works is handling the whole problem of drainage in a very piecemeal, childlike fashion. That is why I seriously ask the Parliamentary Secretary to sit down with the officers of the Board and to enter into consultation with his colleagues in the Government so that they may have a whole new approach to this question of drainage. I have the honour to be a Member of this House for 25 years and I venture to say that in the past 25 years, if the records are gone back over, on every second Vote for the Office of Public Works reference has been made to the Nore, the Boyne and the Shannon. That is a quarter of a century gone in talk. Are we going to sit and talk for another quarter of a century? An ounce of action is worth a ton of talk and the time has come for us to provide courageously for drainage in an effort to increase production from our land and even to give the ratepayers value for their money. Proper drainage schemes would provide a great deal of employment in rural Ireland.

The second priority of the Office of Public Works, if not ranking with the first, should be the provision of new schools. It is right and proper to put on the records, a tribute to the architects in the Office of Public Works for their designing of new schools. We have here portrayed a very fine example of airy, clean, well-designed and apparently well-constructed national schools. It is only right and proper that a word of thanks should be put on the record to the engineering section and the architectural section of the Office of Public Works for what I consider to be an excellent plan of a good, modern school.

The Parliamentary Secretary should be aware that one of the most urgent problems we are facing in rural Ireland today is the complete elimination of our hovel-like, insanitary and badly-aired schools. We are embarking on a general scheme of educational re-organisation but, in many parts of rural Ireland, we still have damp hovels called national schools. In many areas you have in overcrowded national schools the old dry toilets, and some of the most appalling sanitary conditions, conditions which are beyond description. The Board of Works should carry out for the Department of Education, with the least possible delay, schemes for the provision of schools that can be described as healthy and modern. If the Office of Public Works are about to carry out improvement and maintenance schemes of national schools, top priority shourd be given to the provision of proper sanitary facilities.

Perhaps, Sir, the Estimate for the Department of Education might be a more suitable occasion on which to comment on the condition of our national schools. It perhaps is the most appropriate Department to deal with the matter, but I am aware that neither the Department of Education nor the Office of Public Works have the co-operation they could and should have from many school managers. That is why I would have hoped that when we have good and progressive school managers, we would not have the odd one lagging behind.

I may be on the very edge, or outside the bounds, of the debate on the Estimate for the Office of Public Works. However, they have sent their engineers to these schools and usually there is consultation with the school manager in regard to the cost of repairs and the proposed works to be carried out. The Office of Public Works, as the agents of the Department of Education, must submit plans, specifications and proposed improvement schemes to the schools manager. Very often we have the school manager complaining that the Office of Public Works are unreasonable in drafting too elaborate a proposal for him to undertake. If the school manager does not proceed with such work, the Office of Public Works or the Department of Education cannot compel him to do so. I doubt that there is any regulation to compel him to do so.

I hope to take up at another time and in another place the suggestion that every bishop in Ireland should appoint one of his clergy as an inspector of school managers for the purpose of seeing whether there are school managers with schools not up to the required standard, so that the necessary action can be taken. We cannot allow our children to attend schools in insanitary and unhealthy conditions where the Office of Public Works have proposals for carrying out improvements and where they are not done. I shall leave it at that because I am sure I have trespassed on the very edge of the debate.

On the very edge: the Deputy very skilfully got around it.

These inspectors should be responsible for reporting to the bishop the condition of the schools and the failure of the school managers to do their job.

That is the job of Deputy Flanagan.

Yes; I am giving the Parliamentary Secretary food for thought. Surely he does not expect me to go around and inspect schools but I have done so, and may I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for the prompt action he took on any complaints I made? I repeat that in regard to any complaints I made about schools in my constituency the Office of Public Works did not put them on the long finger. If certain works were not carried out, I got the reason why.

There is some driving force behind the school manager preventing him from doing his work. I am pressing this matter so as to get it in its proper perspective. I am sorry to say that some of our national schools would not be found in the bush in parts of Africa. Indeed, schools in parts of Africa must be better than they are in rural Ireland today. I am sure you, Sir, know that there are insanitary schools. This is the only way we have of seeing that something will be done and that our schools will be put into a sanitary condition.

The Deputy could reserve that for the Department of Education.

I will. There is another matter which I shall not reserve for the Department of Education and it relates to our ancient monuments for which the Parliamentary Secretary must share a certain responsibility. Many of our ancient monuments are in the custody of the Office of Public Works under the National Monuments Act, 1930, and the amending Act of 1954. These national monuments are real treasures. Wherever these national monuments are situated, they have for generations been an inspiration for the future and certainly they cast great credit on the great men and women of the past. But the greatest of all these national monuments, in my opinion, is Clonmacnoise.

Yes, Tara. I went to Tara and I could not find it. I spent a whole day in the district of Tara and could not find it.

There must have been some other attraction there when the Deputy could not find it.

And the Deputy is a Pioneer.

I was there looking to see what monuments and relics of the past were there. I was told I was there. I could see nothing, certainly nothing to show it was Tara.

There were no stones there; they were all gone.

They were in Dublin for the Rosc Exhibition.

Now, if there is not something to be seen in Tara, there is something to be seen in Clonmacnoise. Not alone is Clonmacnoise a great national treasure but it ranked as one of the world's great seats of learning. How many people throughout the country have never availed themselves of the opportunity of seeing the great Seven Churches of Clonmacnoise, of seeing the burial places of saints, of princes, of bishops and of kings? It is the last resting place of the last High King of Ireland. If there was ever a national monument held dear to the hearts of the people of Offaly, Westmeath and Roscommon it is Clonmacnoise. I suppose the same affection obtains in the areas in which there are other great relics of the past.

I can recall, when dealing with the Estimates for Transport and Power and Industry and Commerce, in relation to Bord Fáilte and tourism, making a complaint that we have never had sufficient publicity to attract attention to our national monuments. The publicity which our national monuments have got this year does not reflect great credit on those responsible. There are many views as to whether the stones that have been in Clonmacnoise during the past hundreds of years should have been removed to Dublin to be put on exhibition, to let people see them. That problem applies to all the other national monuments that have been taken from their original sites to the Rose exhibition. If Saint Kieran had wished to build Clonmacnoise in Ballsbridge he would have done so, but he selected Clonmacnoise for his monastery not Ballsbridge.

He could not get planning permission.

He was not the only one who could not get planning permission in Dublin.

These ancient stones, crosses and slabs have been uprooted and taken up to the exhibition so that certain people could see them. Why did they not go to see them on their original sites? The taking of these monuments from their original sites must necessarily lessen their historical value. There is a difference of opinion on this. The Minister for Finance and the Parliamentary Secretary may say "no", that we must uproot all our national monuments and bring them up for exhibition and take them back again.

They did not bring them all. There were cracks in the Donegal ones.

I must admit that an effort was made to bring up some of the national monuments, but because of age and the delicate operation involved in their removal the instructions were cancelled. Not alone can these monuments be described as relics of the past, but in many parts of rural Ireland they are of great religious significance. Therefore, it is wrong to take certain stones from churches that were consecrated, stones that were used as part of the buildings, of monasteries which 800 or 1,000 years ago were the centres of religious worship, to satisfy the curiosity of a dozen or two cranks in Dublin who never thought it worth their while to go down and look at them when they were in Clonmacnoise or elsewhere.

The removal of these national monuments has been a national disgrace, has lessened the value of the monuments, has been an endeavour to throw ridicule on them, to lower respect for them. It certainly has been an endeavour in no small way to belittle the historic value of these relics of the past.

I suppose it is a little early for the Parliamentary Secretary to give to the House an idea of what the cost of the removal of the monuments was and whether the committee in charge of this exhibition will pay all costs involved. This debate gives the Parliamentary Secretary the opportunity to say whether this will be a frequent occurrence. If some of these ancient stones are to be taken back to Clonmacnoise and places like it and are to be removed again and brought to another exhibition in four years time they will come to disaster. This handful of cranks who were so curious about our ancient monuments and so anxious to see them did not think it worth their while to go down and look at them where they have been since the establishment of these monasteries. It was improper of the Government to allow these national treasures to be hawked around the country.

During the passage of the 1930 National Monuments Act and the amending Act of 1954, great emphasis was laid on the necessity for preserving our national monuments, but the most recent effort seemed, in my opinion, to be an effort not of preservation but to belittle them, to damage them and to undermine the historical tradition behind them—to ransack and to rob sacred places like Clonmacnoise where these treasures have been associated with the townlands and the districts.

I suppose other Deputies have done so and others still will do so, but I wish to put on record my strongest objection and criticism of the failure of the Government properly to preserve our national monuments by falling for the request of the committee responsible for this exhibition. This should be the problem of the National Monuments Advisory Committee. When permission was sought for the removal of these monuments to Dublin the advisory council recommended against their removal. What is the purpose of having an advisory council? What is the purpose of having highly qualified men to give advice on any matter if the Minister takes the opposite line?

Do you want the advisory council to make the decisions also?

Do you want the Minister to obey the advisory council at all times?

No. Far from it. The purpose of such a council is to give advice.

That is right.

In this case the Minister asked the advisory council for their advice as to whether the monuments should be removed or not. This was advice from experts.

Like yourself.

I am not an expert on this matter. Neither is the Parliamentary Secretary. Neither is the Minister. We may be experts in our own spheres of activity. I claim to be an expert in buying and selling.

Especially in selling.

The Parliamentary Secretary, Deputy Lalor, would find himself an expert behind his counter, particularly if he had simple-minded customers coming in.

There are no simple-minded customers.

I have to admit that there are very few in that part of the Deputy's constituency. The Minister for Finance cannot claim to be an expert in the matter of the removal of the stones from Clonmacnoise to Dublin for exhibition.

He has a National Monuments Advisory Council to make recommendations in relation to that matter. He asks for their advice and then the Minister says that it makes no odds what their advice is, that he has made up his mind that the monuments will be removed to Dublin. Undoubtedly, this is a source of great amusement to the Fianna Fáil Party but I doubt if it is a source of amusement to the the National Monuments Advisory Council.

There is only one monument in the Fine Gael benches.

He has admitted that he is an ancient monument—a quarter of a century.

It is a long time. My ambition is to be half a century here.

I am sure that, if the Deputy asks Deputy Tully nicely, he will see to that.

The Deputy will have to take lessons from Deputy Corry.

I leave Deputy Lalor to worry about Deputy Colley.

Deputy Corry.

I will leave Deputy Colley and Deputy Corry to Deputy Lalor.

I will be very pleased.

They do not come within the scope of my protection. I want to voice my objection in the strongest possible terms to the removal of these monuments. It is no harm to express an opinion in all sincerity.

The Deputy said he was an expert in his field. His field is sincerity.

In my field as a politician I always exercise, first, charity and then sincerity. I am giving the Parliamentary Secretary the benefit of my sincerity and my charity.

Those are two gifts of the Holy Ghost. I am sure the Deputy has the others.

Again, I leave that to the Parliamentary Secretary's judgment. I want to go on record as saying that it was wrong to remove these monuments.

I have here Vote 8—Office of Public Works. Subhead E is for new works, alterations and additions. I have here the Estimate for 1967-68. What will be the picture of Government spending through the Office of Public Works in future? The total cost of the extension and alterations to Leinster House is estimated at £660,000 for which a sum of £75,000 is provided in this Estimate. There is a sum of £375,000 estimated to be spent on Dublin Castle, on the State Apartments, rebuilding of drawingroom, bedroom block and entrance. The sum provided in the Estimate for 1967-68 is £75,000.

What justification is there for spending such large sums on money on rebuilding the drawingroom, bedroom block and main entrance at Dublin Castle when there is such an appalling housing shortage, when there are so many families living in overcrowded and unhealthy conditions? Improvements to the bedroom block and drawingroom at Dublin Castle might be all right if the housing needs were met but we have reached a stage when housing has become a national emergency.

Serious thought should be given to our priorities. Houses comes before the provision of an ornamental bedroom in Dublin Castle where nobody has slept for hundreds of years, where nobody intends to sleep or wants to sleep. The taxpayers' money is being spent in considerable amounts on this work while there are families, old persons and sick persons living in the most deporable housing conditions and we are told that there is no money to provide houses for them. Local authorities will not be allowed to provide cottages and there is general uproar and a demand for houses which cannot be provided because of a shortage of capital. Here we see capital in no small amount going into work of this kind on Dublin Castle.

I should like to make a brief reference to St. Stephen's Green. I would appeal to the Parliamentary Secretary and to the Office of Public Works not to concentrate all their efforts on erecting memorials in St. Stephen's Green. The Green is a very beautiful park. It is well designed and well kept. Those responsible for it deserve the highest praise. If we are, however, to have blocks of concrete here and there these will detract considerably from the appearance of the Green. I appeal to the Parliamentary Secretary to put a stop to these blocks of concrete appearing here and there in St. Stephen's Green. Surely more suitable places can be found for memorials rather than despoiling this beautiful public pleasure park.

Last year there was provision in the Estimate for a sum of £20,000 in relation to the state of Thomas Davis. In this year's Estimate a sum of £1,000 is provided under the same heading. None of us today knows what Davis looked like. I wonder was he really like this statute. I do not think he was. I think the work is out of proportion. I do not think it looks well. It may be excellent modern art; I am not a good judge of modern art.

The Deputy should go to the Rosc exhibition.

I hope to see it, and see if any damage was done to the stones, and so on.

The stones are not in the Rosc exhibition.

Quite so. I may go to the exhibition. We seem to be living in an era of revolutionary change in relation to art and everything else. Certainly I do not care for a good deal of modern art. I have not seen the statue of Wolfe Tone.

The language in which to describe it would not be allowed in this House.

Why a bronze statue to Thomas Davis? I think bronze is a dreary, cold medium. It has not got the same atmosphere that marble has. I do not like bronze statues. I prefer marble. I shall have a look at the Wolfe Tone memorial when I have time. I trust I shall not be disappointed. I trust it is not as drab-looking and as dreary-looking as the Thomas Davis memorial. To me the latter is wholly out of keeping with the man's literary record and with the high standing he enjoyed, nationally and internationally.

Why does the Deputy always criticise the work of an Irishman?

If an Irishman does a good job he deserves praise. If an Irishman does something which calls for criticism, then I think nothing is more welcome to him than that criticism because it enables him to improve.

A crib in modern design was erected at Dublin Airport last winter. The Archbishop of Dublin ordered it to be removed. The images could be described as anything but the kind of images one associates with the Christmas crib. We must have modern art. We must have proper designs for memorials and statues in keeping with the present and the past. Monuments commemorating the past must resemble the past. If monuments are designed to look like nothing on earth I do not see how they can pay tribute to the past, the present, or anything else.

I believe we have good Irish sculptors. I do not know any of them but I trust that they will in future produce a better standard of work than that designed to commemorate Thomas Davis. The expert on art may find some merit in it. I am not an expert. I cannot see anything artistic in it. I would wager any money that Thomas Davis never in his life looked like that monstrosity down in College Green. None of us can accurately describe what Davis was like but we can all assume that he was nothing like the memorial we have erected to him.

I want to give a warning now. If there is to be a memorial to the late President John F. Kennedy, let no mistake be made. There is nothing here to show what form it will take, whether it is to be a statute or something else. If it is a statue, I hope it will be something that will bear a resemblance and I would recommend that it should not be bronze.

The Wolfe Tone memorial cost £15,000. Maybe it was money well spent: I cannot say. If I had £15,000 to spend, I should leave the memorial aside and I should first provide our people with houses.

When will the Parliamentary Secretary be in a position to furnish the House with particulars of a complete survey of our requirements of Garda stations? In some parts of the country, gardaí have to work and, in some instances, sleep in conditions that are far from pleasant in big, cold, draughty and insanitary buildings. It is high time each Garda district had a proper Garda headquarters. Like drainage, this problem is being tackled in a very half-hearted manner—a couple of Garda barracks here, there, and elsewhere. The gardaí are the custodians of life and property. They are an excellent police force. It is time serious action was taken in the matter of the improvement and the provision of Garda barracks.

Members of the Garda Síochána experience many difficulties in regard to housing. There is a heavy demand on local authorities to provide houses for the working-classes. Houses are in short supply throughout the country and even more so in the city. I cannot understand why a suitable site is not made available in every Garda area and a number of houses for gardaí built there. It would solve the housing problem for members of the Garda Síochána.

Many young gardaí are anxious to marry and settle down. Transfer problems arise on marriage. It is very embarrassing for gardaí to have to live in rooms, or flats or to share houses. They have to live up to a fairly high standard. A sum of £65,000 is being provided for houses for married members of the Garda Síochána but that amount is insignificant in view of actual requirements.

The additional accommodation required in the Land Registry is a matter of extreme urgency. It is essential to put the Land Registry in offices where the work can be carried out with efficiency. That accommodation should have been provided long ago. I trust no time will be lost in attending to this urgent matter.

A fire alarm system is being provided in the National Library and in the National Museum at a total cost of £9,250 for the National Library and £6,750 for the National Museum. What type of fire alarm system is this? Is it a kind of fire siren? We are entitled to that information. There appear to be unusual circumstances but what they are I do not know.

There has been much criticism of the cost of works carried out by the Office of Public Works in Government Buildings.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.
Top
Share