I move:
That in view of the widespread unemployment and consequent hardship caused by the merger of minor employment and bog development schemes with rural improvement schemes, the reduction of the total vote in respect thereof by approximately one-half, and the absence of any or any adequate plan or scheme to absorb those who have lost employment, Dáil Éireann calls upon the Government to restore the said schemes in their original form and the amount of money needed to implement them.
This motion is being discussed long after the decision was taken to merge these two well-known rural schemes, the minor employment and bog development schemes and the rural improvement schemes. The operation of those schemes is well known to Deputies on all sides of the House, particularly those who represent rural areas and areas where there are a great number of by-roads, bog roads, accommodation roads and drains, none of which comes within the category of major allocations for this particular kind of work.
I recall being at an interview with several other Deputies from the west of Ireland, the north and the south, in the company of people who were employed on those schemes as supervisors and gangers. To those men this merging meant very real problems. It meant the cessation of employment which they had, admittedly over a limited portion of the year. Nevertheless, it was employment for them of a highly remunerative character and it was extremely necessary to meet the calls made upon the average small householder at that time of the year. We had this interview with the Parliamentary Secretary at the time, Deputy Gibbons. The whole business has since been transferred to the Department of Local Government.
It was said during the course of that interview that the earnings of those men and the men who worked under them, were needed to buy Christmas commodities and also helped towards paying the rates at that time. The rates question is not valid now because of the reduction in or in some cases the wiping out of rates on agricultural land. That was a small matter because the rates on buildings are still there. Anyone who builds a new house or makes an addition or instals a bathroom still has to pay relatively high rates in areas such as these, rates indeed which it is doubtful that they will have the capacity to bear for very much longer unless there is some kind of plan or scheme to implement the half of these works that has gone.
A very essential difference between the two schemes was that the minor employment and bog development schemes generally did not carry any burden of local subscription. They were completely free, as the saying goes, and the money was granted in full to do a particular job. Rural improvement schemes, on the other hand, were subject at various times to a subscription of five per cent, ten per cent or possibly higher, but there was always a certain amount of tolerance, if I may use that word in this regard, as to what the percentage would be. Nevertheless, it meant there was a subscription.
