Vol. 325 No. 3
I move:
That a supplementary sum not exceeding £6,390,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1980, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of Public Works; for certain domestic expenses; for expenditure in respect of public buildings; for the maintenance of certain parks and public works; for the execution and maintenance of drainage and other engineering works; and for payment of a grant-in-aid.
This Supplementary Estimate is necessary to meet increases in the cost of the services rendered by the Office of Public Works. The gross additional amount required, £7,940,000 is offset partly by an estimated increase in Appropriations-in-Aid, subhead K, and partly by estimated savings on certain other subheads of the vote, leaving a net requirement of £6,390,000.
I give hereunder, for the information of Deputies, details of the subheads for which the additional sums are required. The excess under subhead B.1. arises from the increased costs of travelling and subsistence. Expenditure under subhead E covers a large number of building and construction works on hands and at all stages of progress. The additional money is needed to ensure that the on-going programme, which contributes significantly towards maintaining employment levels in the building industry, is not retarded. Subheads F. 1., F. 2. and F. 4. relate to the maintenance, furnishing, heating and lighting of State-owned property, and the additional sums now being sought are needed to enable the Office of Public Works to meet increased costs and wages and to discharge their obligations in these matters.
An additional sum of £85,000 is required under subhead F.5. to meet the cost of reconstruction of Waterford Courthouse which is being undertaken by the Commissioners of Public Works pursuant to the Courthouses (Provision and Maintenance) Act, 1935. The work has proceeded more rapidly than was expected. The expenditure is recoverable from the local authority.
A sum of £1,470,000 is sought under subhead G.2. in order to maintain progress on the arterial drainage construction schemes on the rivers Boyne, Maigue and Corrib/Mask/Robe. Apart from the benefits which accrue to landowners from the execution of these schemes, they provide valuable employment.
Subhead G. 3. provides for the maintenance of completed drainage schemes and embankment works, and an additional sum of £156,000 is needed to meet the cost of pay increases awarded to drainage workers during the year. The expenditure under this subhead is recoverable from the county councils concerned. A net additional sum of £456,000 is needed under subhead H to meet the increasing costs of servicing the large amount of machinery now in use on the expanded arterial drainage programme.
A sum of £63,000 is needed under subhead I as more extensive maintenance works than provided for were found necessary at Rosslare, Wicklow and Youghal and expenditure on the coast protection scheme in progress at Enniscrone has been greater than expected. An additional amount of £90,000 is needed under subhead J. 1. to cover the cost of some excavations not provided for in the original estimate and for increased activity on other maintenance works. Provision is also made for pay increases due under the terms of the second national understanding.
We are having so many Supplementary Estimates that we would need a budget. Quite a number of matters are covered by this Supplementary Estimate. Possibly one of the most immediate problems concerns our surroundings. For instance, the barrier at the entrance to this House has been out of order for the past two or three weeks. The people in charge of it employed a private contractor in the past to repair it, rather than the Office of Public Works, because the Office of Public Works are too slow. When they contacted the private contractor recently, he would not do the job for the simple reason that he was not paid for the last job.
He was not from Donegal.
I just want to bring that to the notice of the Minister. We talk about this House in the debate on the annual Estimate if we are given an opportunity, and if the Estimates are not all passed en bloc at the end of the year. We talk about the accommodation available to Members of Dáil and Seanad Éireann. Five Deputies work in the room I work in. Together with a typist we work in a room 20 feet by 18 feet. We try to do our writing and make our telephone calls, if the telephone works. By virtue of the fact that the telephone does not work very often, it takes longer to make calls. The typewriter is banging away. If the Office of Public Works cannot provide the necessary accommodation for Deputies and Senators I would suggest that the provision of silent typewriters would eliminate a lot of the banging and make it easier for Deputies to carry out their work. I made a similar request before but had little success. In general proper secretarial equipment is totally lacking.
Secretarial equipment is not a matter for this Minister, who is only concerned with furniture.
Secretarial equipment is part of the furniture. It has reached the stage where typists have to buy their own Tipp-Ex.
The Government used up all the supply revising Estimates.
That is probably what happened. I have often drawn attention to the lack of facilities for Members in this House and there is little point in going into detail about them again, but an effort must be made to improve the situation.
I should now like to deal with my favourite subject in relation to this Estimate, arterial drainage and maintenance. I was surprised to see that the Minister had not made any provision to deal with a number of drainage problems which I brought to his attention some time ago. There is an increase in the amount allocated for maintenance but, as the Minister mentioned, that is recoverable from local authorities. He must be aware of the difficulty local authorities face in regard to the amount of money they can spend. As a member of a local authority I must complain that the Office of Public Works provide money for such maintenance without discussing the matter with the local authorities. The fact that local authorities must pay for such work means that their resources suffer.
Last year I was given a commitment that the maintenance work on the Cregg river would be carried out in 1980, but no work has been done on that river to date. I do not know whether it is proposed to carry out the work in 1981, but the Minister should bear in mind the urgency of the matter. I was under the impression that after arterial drainage works were carried out the maintenance was done on a regular basis.
I should like to bring to the attention of the Minister of State the problem in relation to the Corrib drainage scheme. That scheme was carried out in three phases — the third phase is now in progress — but it has been pointed out to me that the water gets in a little fast adjacent to the Salmon Weir Bridge. Apparently the sit has built up adjacent to that bridge and has caused flooding.
The condition of the Cregg river is the same now as it was before the scheme commenced. The silt must be removed. I do not know whether the Office of Public Works are aware of this problem but the local fishing interests can outline the difficulties in greater detail.
The work carried out on the Black river at Headford was not done to the satisfaction of the local people. As a result a number of areas, Belclare, Caherlistrane and Tulrush are flooded annually. In fact, for most of this year approximately 100 acres of land was covered by water. It was like a miniature lake. Some action should be taken to relieve that flooding. In general the maintenance programme is not satisfactory. I appreciate that 1980 was a difficult year to carry out such work, but local people are not satisfied.
There is little point in throwing bouquets at the Office of Public Works for something they do not do, because work is not being carried out to the satisfaction of local people.
Annually we hear talk of millions being allocated from Europe for arterial drainage. It is hard to know where to commence when discussing arterial drainage because, firstly, one must question the Government's policy in that regard. I was under the impression that the Government laid down this policy and that civil servants operated it, but I suggest that the Government do not have a policy and the civil servants go along in their own carefree way doing exactly what they want to do. There is no direction, not that one could direct them very much one way or the other; they would not be too inclined to take directions.
The Minister of State is responsible, not the civil servants.
That is a terrible charge to levy against the Minister of State.
The Minister of State is responsible for everything in regard to the Office of Public Works, and under the Rules of the House a Deputy may not attack civil servants.
The Chair is very touchy this morning.
I am not touchy, I am merely outlining the Rules of the House.
The Deputy is saying that the civil servants do not have the money to carry out the jobs.
It was not my intention to make a personal attack on them. It is up to the Government to lay down policies to be implemented by the civil servants. There is a lack of policy as far as arterial drainage is concerned and there is also a lack of political commitment to have work carried out. In the past arterial drainage was broken into three different categories, major, minor and smaller than that. There were a number of works done and I presume more of the necessary finance was available then. Recently there was a £42 million package from the EEC and it was decided to spend £28 million on field drainage and the remainder on arterial drainage. I do not know how the schemes were selected but they were not altogether to the satisfaction of interests in the county that I represent because we did not get one penny of that money.
Let me say a few words about the Dunkellin. If for every hour spent talking here about the drainage of the Dunkellin a mile or a half mile of the drainage scheme was carried out, it would have been completed a long time ago. I have a lot of documentation on that river. I put down a question recently asking the Minister what was the latest situation in this regard. The Minister's predecessor told me that money was no problem. Not alone did he tell me that but he told a deputation from Galway which was representative of all political parties that he could not get engineers. That was a long time ago. Perhaps the present Minister can tell me if those engineers have been obtained now to prepare a scheme and carry out the work on the Dunkellin. Has there been any attempt to get them? If not, why have they not been got? At the time there were officials from the Department whose sole job was to listen to what was said and to take action. But no action has been taken. There is no political will in the Government to carry out this scheme or the general arterial drainage programme. In 1978 I asked what was the number of people involved in a cost benefit analysis survey and the numbers ranged from one in 1970 to eight in 1978 and I am sure that in 1979 and 1980 there were no more personnel employed on this. The highest numbers were in 1974 when there were ten and in 1977 when there were ten. If money became available from the EEC next year we could not avail of it because our schemes are not prepared. The amount of money being spent on this by the Office of Public Works on an actual basis has been affected by inflation to such a degree that the amount of work being done is less and less. What is happening? That is the question we are all asking. Is the Minister doing anything? Perhaps there are people in Kerry and elsewhere who are satisfied with the performance of the Government in relation to this and all the other things.
Not in Kerry.
The Deputy is now getting into policy matters. We cannot get into that. The Supplementary Estimate only applies to three or four rivers. We cannot take every river in the country into account.
Under one heading there is a sum of money required for arterial drainage.
It refers to only three or four rivers.
I will get around to talking about the other rivers as well at some stage.
That is all right as long as we keep to the Supplementary Estimate. When the general Estimate comes in all the other matters can be dealt with.
At the same time one must appreciate that so far as this Government are concerned there is a total lack of responsibility in relation to arterial drainage. I want some information from the Minister as to what the Government's policy is.
That is a policy matter and cannot be discussed on this Supplementary Estimate.
I am sorry to see no provision for smaller schemes. It is necessary that money be made available for smaller schemes which at this stage have been dropped entirely. In every publication and provincial newspaper there is news about flooding in one area or another. This is the responsibility of the Office of Public Works and no effort is being made to do anything about it. I am also sorry that there is no mention of additional money being spent——
We cannot deal with matters that are not in the Supplementary Estimate.
This is in relation to maintenance.
If the Deputy says there is no money in the Supplementary Estimate for a particular item, then he cannot deal with that item.
I am asking the Minister why he does not provide money in the Estimate.
The Deputy can do that on the general Estimate but not on the Supplementary Estimate. We can debate only what is actually in the Supplementary Estimate under the headings shown in it.
I will move away from drainage, having made the point that I am not satisfied with what has been done. I would like to hear a statement from the Minister as to what he proposes to do under that heading.
There is in this Supplementary Estimate a provision for courthouses. I presume I am entitled to say a few words about that.
It simply refers to Waterford Courthouse.
Is the Chair preventing me from expressing an opinion on the particular problem?
The Deputy is confined to the Supplementary Estimate. I am sorry. They are not my rules. They are the Standing Orders and the rulings of the Chair down through the years. On a Supplementary Estimate the Deputy can debate only what is in it. We cannot deal with other matters. We can deal only with what the Minister is providing for.
In that case I would say that I am glad that the Minister has seen fit to spend a certain amount of money on courthouses in Waterford but I would wish that similar amounts were spent on other courthouses throughout the country. It has been stated by justices that they may not act unless moneys are being spent.
The Deputy knows that the local authority have the responsibility of providing courthouses.
I know that.
I have told Deputy Donnellan that the only thing involved here is Waterford Courthouse. Courthouses generally are a matter for local authorities and, as stated, this amount will be recouped from the Government.
This is the point I was going to make. I would like to thank the Minister of State for the direction in which he is trying to lead us. I am aware that the money spent on courthouses comes from the local authority but, as a result of certain decisions made prior to the 1977 election, the amount of money available to local authorities for one thing or another is rather limited. The expenditure on courthouses should be totally by the Minister's own office.
The Chair has advised the Deputy that he can debate Waterford Courthouse and nothing else.
I would suggest the Department of Justice.
The Office of Public Works.
This question should be directed to the Department of Justice.
I am sorry, Minister, the Chair will try to keep the debate on the rails.
Give me a chance.
I am giving the Deputy every latitude.
This £85,000 is required for Waterford Courthouse. The Department are going to say, "We want that £85,000 back" to a local authority who possibly have not a shilling. They are trying to get something out of them and this is as a result of some decisions made some time ago by the Department. The Minister is saying that the local authority are responsible but the Government have taken away the means they had of raising a few pounds. The authority of local authorities is being eroded gradually, indeed almost totally. As a result the Minister can direct them to do anything he likes but they will be mortgaged if they do a few more of these jobs. I will be delighted to see the money being spent on Waterford Courthouse. I wish similar efforts were made throughout the entire country.
We had the National Heritage Bill, 1980, before this House and we tried to persuade the Government to support us in that Bill if they were not themselves bringing in legislation. At that time we were promised by the office that legislation would be here before Christmas. It was like Deputy Wilson's promise regarding education.
The Chair does not want to interrupt the Deputy, but we cannot debate legislation on an Estimate.
Surely under an Estimate that provides for increased cost to cover wages it is legitimate to discuss the activities for which it is being paid.
The Chair has ruled that we cannot debate legislation on an Estimate. That is in Standing Orders and rulings of the Chair all down the years. We are getting now into a debate on legislation.
Salaries have come up.
Even so, the rulings of the Chair provide that you cannot debate legislation in any form on an Estimates debate.
I will refer to this document circulated to us here. Under heading J 1, National Monuments, an additional £90,000 is required to meet the cost of maintenance and exploration programme. Am I entitled to express an opinion on anything in this document?
Of course. The Deputy cannot debate legislation but he can debate every heading in this document.
We are talking about £90,000 under National Monuments.
That is fair enough.
Is there any difficulty about that?
Not at all.
The Chair should be obeyed, and Deputy Begley makes a habit of coming in to question every decision of the Chair.
I will not be lectured by the Chair.
The Chair will not be lectured by Deputy Begley.
The Chair will not be lectured by anybody. Deputy Donnellan is in possession, and the Chair will help him as far as it can.
I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle. If we allowed every Deputy who stands up here to go rambling along talking irrelevancies we would be here all day.
I would be in all sorts of trouble.
Under heading J 1, National Monuments, an additional sum of £90,000 is required to meet the cost of maintenance and exploration programme. I wonder how that is to be spent. I have already referred to the lack of support from the Government party for the legislation we tried to introduce in which we were supported by the Labour Party and particularly by Deputy Quinn. If progress has been made in that direction the Minister might let us know. Is any part of the £90,000 referred to here being spent on the exploration of the Viking site at Wood Quay? Rather than get into further complications with the Chair I will refer the Minister to an article in The Irish Times of Wednesday, 3 December 1980. It would be an education for both himself and the OPW not alone to read it but to try to digest it. They should take it upon themselves to ensure that ten artefacts being excavated there, the wall referred to in the article in question, the Wood Quay site generally and many other such sites throughout the country, about 1,800 of them, that in reply to a parliamentary question we were told had been destroyed, will even at this late stage be preserved. If they are lost they will not be found again. Possibly the Minister will take some action in that direction in the long-promised legislation.
He will be an ancient monument himself by then.
Perhaps he will indicate when this will be. I presume that under wages I can refer to the regional offices of the OPW since a certain amount of this increase in wages will go to these offices. I am not happy about the efficiency of these offices, particularly the limited number that I am familiar with personally. I urge the Minister to have an investigation carried out into the OPW regional offices that deal with the school building programme with a view to trying to update them and particularly their efficiency. The Board of Works are responsible for carrying out work on primary schools. I am not satisfied with the lack of progress made by this Office in that direction. In many instances, the files that are referred to local offices lie idle for a long time. No effort is made by anybody to ensure that the work is done effectively. That is something that needs investigation. The Minister should do something about it.
It is the duty of this Office to carry out work on Garda stations. The Minister may say that this is a matter for the Department of Justice but generally the contract comes to this Office. I am sure the Minister is aware that gardaí at the Oughterard Garda Station walked out of the building they were in for the sole reason that the condition of the building was such that they had to take this drastic action. The Minister should look into this and have something done about it.
There are so many offices that deal with these problems that the problems are referred from one office to another. It might be a good thing to have a building unit set up in the Department of Justice to deal with Garda stations and as far as national schools are concerned to have works carried out by the Office of Public Works transferred to the building unit of the Department of Education.
Under G.3 — arterial drainage and maintenance — an additional sum of £156,000 is required for increased costs and wages. Are there any plans or have any efforts been made towards drainage of the River Shannon? In the wages mentioned, can I assume that the Minister has people engaged in carrying out a survey of that river? Many of its tributaries cause problems to many farmers and these could be alleviated. Perhaps the Minister in his reply would give some indication of what progress, or as usual lack of it, was made since we last dealt with an estimate or supplementary estimate regarding it.
The Minister might take note of what I have said and give priority to the River Corandulla because of the promise made that it would be done last year. It was not done last year but I am sure that if the silt was removed from the main Corrib River upstream from the salmon weir at Galway for a few miles it would alleviate the problem.
I have listened to your administration of rules, Sir, for which you are not responsible and did not draw up, in relation to an estimates speech and I wish to comply with them as far as possible.
This is a Supplementary Estimate in addition to the primary Estimate brought in at the beginning of the year. The Minister of State is asking the House to vote extra money without reference in any way to how it will be raised in order to meet additional costs that have arisen in the time since the original estimate was drawn up and this supplementary one was brought in. The Minister has given no justification as to why the extra money should be paid for by the House in advance of us seeing in what way the money will be raised.
The Minister, in his speech, described the details of the £6 million that he requires but did not say how it was that they got it wrong at the beginning of the year or what occurred that necessitated this amount. When the Government party published their manifesto in 1977 we argued that it was a political lie to promise so much for so little. When this comprehensive budget was introduced last year, my colleague, Deputy O'Leary, Labour party spokesperson for Finance, said that an autumn budget would be necessary because the estimates were a financial lie relative to what it was proposed to raise and spend. The truth of that charge, I make it quite seriously, is that the budget from the new, exiting Minister for Finance and his Minister of State was a financial lie last February and this is the proof of it. To seriously suggest that expenditure for OPW could be met for the year 1980 by a net increase of 3 per cent would not have fooled the porter in the Minister's office let alone a junior executive officer.
The original estimate proposed to increase the sum from £44 million to £45 million. We now have the real estimate for which no tax has been levied. It is, if my figures are right, approximately 13.9 per cent of an increase less the rate of inflation. No matter what way one juggles the figures there is a net reduction in terms of output of the services of the Department this year. There is no way the Minister can explain to the House — although God knows this Government would defy Einstein with their ability to juggle figures — and say that inflation is less than 13.9 per cent. The net effect of this Supplementary Estimate, the real budget, is to increase the overall budget by 13.9 per cent.
It would be reasonable and acceptable to the House if the Minister of State could say that in the intervening period when this budget was first cast a number of extraordinary price increases took place which he, as Minister for State responsible for his Department in casting this budget could not possibly anticipate and it is because of that that he is now looking for supplementary moneys. If one analyses the £6 million which the Minister is looking for, there are two items in it which amount to a 9.2 per cent increase on last year. They are capital items. The first is Subhead E. — New Works Alterations and Additions — and the second is Subhead G.2. If one adds those two together and expresses them as a percentage of last year's budget, they represent an increase of 9.2 per cent. Is the Minister seriously telling the House that some time between now and February the Office of Public Works, which are not renowned for the alacrity with which they move, will move so fast and so quickly that two major capital programmes are discovered which cost basically £4 million?
We know from the workings of the Office of Public Works and their dependence on information from other Government Departments, local authorities and from the general difficulties — I recognise that there are difficulties attached to a large, traditional organisation trying to move through various Departments — that there is no way that any Department, particularly the Office of Public Works, could move that quickly. It is not sufficient for a Minister of State, seeking to raise an additional £6 million without reference as to how it is going to be provided or how it is going to be obtained in terms of taxation, to simply, in a two-page script describe in detail how the £6 million is made up. A responsible Minister of State, who is in charge of his Department and who understands what is going on, would give reasons as to why the extra money was required. We have got no such reasons. If the Minister is to make any recognition of his democratic responsibilities to this institution, which was not brought about easily by our forefathers, he has a democratic obligation to justify why the £6 million is necessary.
I am concentrating on the extra capital items which emerged between last January and now. I am discounting all the other items in the other heads, which can be attributed to increased costs, wages and things which, by and large, the Minister could not reasonably anticipate and over which he has no control. A more prudent and honest Minister would have admitted that inflation could not be only 3 per cent in 1980 and should have anticipated that costs in the Office of Public Works would go up by 10 to 13 per cent. Even taking a Deputy Martin O'Donoghue view, even if they had taken the manifesto view and assumed what the rate of inflation would be as prophesied it would have been higher than the 3 per cent that was estimated for the coming year. It is for that reason I say the Minister is attempting to put to the House a financial lie, which is what this supplementary budget is.
Democracy here is not all that healthy. The public attitude of many of our young people to activities in which we are involved is not so positive that we can encourage and tolerate this kind of duplicity. How can one make a prophesy about the economy in 1977 that inflation is going to be down to 7 per cent in the current year and, at the same time, introduce an estimate at the beginning of the year which shows a net increase of a certain amount and suddenly discover, in the middle of it, that there are two major capital programmes which, if one were to finance and anticipate them, would amount to an increase in the region of 9.2 per cent. That is a serious charge which I am making on the basis of the information which has been provided to the House by the Minister. I should like to be proved wrong. One does not make such a serious charge lightly.
It is for the Minister to detail why, in subhead G.2 and certainly why in subhead E, new works came about so quickly. There is no evidence to suggest that the Board of Works in the past responded or moved quickly. If it has responded and moved that quickly, and if that money has been spent, I would like to know if the normal procedures in relation to tendering, scrutiny and open competition that must govern the administration of public moneys, have been properly adhered to. If the Office of Public Works have managed to spend that money so quickly, to such an extent that the Government are surprised, then they have moved much faster than normally. The House should know if it has been done properly and in full accordance with the procedures relating to public tendering.
I do not wish to make any political comment. As far as I am concerned, the Minister of State has one political task to do, to hold on to two seats in North Kerry. Regrettably, he has not responded to the kind of things that Deputy Donnellan was asking. He is introducing a supplementary budget in the House which, I repeat, is a financial lie, because we forecast back in February that it would not meet the costs required, that the taxation proposed by the Minister for Finance to cover the cost would not be adequate and this is the living proof. If this House were to take half a dozen Supplementary Estimates that we are having now and put them into a supplementary budget, there would be a howl of protest at the idea that the Minister for Finance, who is responsible for the whole nonsense, is being promoted to Brussels in gratitude for activities last year.
It is the first time that the present Minister of State has introduced a Supplementary Estimate. I congratulate him. We expect big things from him.
There is a great shortage of money, there is no use in codding ourselves otherwise. Deputy Donnellan and I come from an area in the west where we need the Board of Works in a big way. We are hoping there will be a large inflow of money into this particular Department from the western drainage scheme. Arterial drainage is the most important thing as far as we are concerned in the west. Deputy Donnellan referred to the Suck and the Shannon. As a member of the Suck drainage board, it is terrible that an old Act can control these rivers. If a river is blocked further on than one can go under the Act, maintenance cannot be carried out. I would like to see that Act changed because if it would be more beneficial to go down a few more yards, it should be possible to do so. We are handicapped in regard to the maintenance of the river Suck which is causing a lot of trouble all around my area. I would not like to be too optimistic about anything being done to the Shannon. If there is anything in the pipeline we will be told about it. The maintenance of the river Suck should not be confined to point A or point B. Roscommon County Council and Galway County Council pay for maintenance but they cannot do the work where it is most needed because they cannot pass point A or B.
To go back to what Deputy Donnellan said about a river in my county, I suggest that it would be ridiculous for Deputy Donnellan to say that our party are not in favour of doing anything about the Dunkellin river or arterial drainage because no Government for the past 20 years cared two hoots about that river. I have been active in this matter since I was a member of Macra na Feirme, when we did a survey of the river and sent up the figures to Dublin. They were very nearly the same as the Department's figures. At that time this river was supposed to be getting serious consideration. Deputy Donnellan's Government were in power for four years and did absolutely nothing about this river. Our own party did nothing either. Nobody can make political capital out of the Dunkellin river, which rises almost beside my home. I drive along that road every week to Galway and it looks like a sea. We cannot do a local improvement scheme because the levels are wrong and we cannot benefit from the Western Drainage Scheme because in order to do field drainage there must be an outlet and the major river must be done first. That is the position of the people in the Dunkellin basin, the most disadvantaged area in the West. It is not even in the disadvantaged areas, although it goes along right from my place into the sea at Clarenbridge, Galway.
They have been talking about cost-benefit, but I would ask the Minister to do the costing and forget about the benefit, which is there for anybody to see. There is no need to do a benefit survey, because anybody with commonsense knowing anything about land and its use would realise that the benefits are there and that you cannot drain or manure land if you do not open the river. I hope the present Minister in charge of the Board of Works will be able to say that in his time something was done to prepare this river and make it eligible for any money that would come from the EEC in future. The five years' money for western areas has all been spent and spent well, I believe, although personally I have some reservations about how it was divided. Some £28 million went for field drainage and £14 million for arterial drainage. I understand all that money has been taken up, but I think we should spend more on arterial drainage, because you cannot do field drainage if the major drains are not cleared. More money should go to the Board of Works to prepare the larger rivers so that field drainage could proceed.
I do not speak just to mention the Dunkellin river, because I am sick of all that has been said about it with nothing being done.
The two Deputies have had a good innings on the Dunkellin river.
Deputy Donnellan was blaming the present Government——
All I am saying is that the Dunkellin does not come under this Supplementary Estimate.
Perhaps not, but if anyone went down to County Galway and said he was in the Dáil and did not mention the Dunkellin river he would have no business there at the next election. The subject has been a hot potato there for years and nothing was done about it by any Government. Deputy Donnellan laid all the blame on the present Government, while I maintain that no Government did anything about it. I am asking the present Minister if he would do something. I am sorry if the Chair accuses me——
I have allowed the Deputy to raise the matter because I allowed Deputy Donnellan to do so, but they should leave it at that.
We want something done about it and we expect action from the present Minister and I am hopeful that he will be able to provide it.
I shall not go as far as the Oughterard barracks, which is a bit outside my territory, but I hope that much more EEC money will be given to arterial drainage. With reference to Deputy Donnellan's comments in this regard, I work in a room here with five people and only one outside phone, but I would continue to work in it if the money saved in that way would drain the Dunkellin river or help to do so even though I do not like the conditions in which we work.
As regards national monuments in my county, I should like to congratulate the Board of Works on a very good job done in Portumna. I would like to see Portumna Abbey included, and I see no reference to it here. I also understand that the old Franciscan Abbey at Kilconnell where I live is on the list — and I would like to know if this is true with a view to having an approach road made to it. There is only a bad road there at present.
If one were to go into everything the Board of Works do one could be here all evening, but there is a good deal of duplication regarding the building of schools, barracks and so on between different Departments. The Department of Education sanction the schools, then hand over to the Board of Works. A number of schools have been built. For instance, the one at Gurteen was badly needed and is being built at present. Generally, the Board of Works are doing a reasonably good job particularly as regards schools, and a new barracks is being built at Menlough. They are pretty active in our county but if they were as active as regards drainage we would be more than congratulatory. They keep any monuments in their care in reasonably good condition.
I do not want to continue because anything further I might say might involve me being pulled up by the Chair. I believe the Chair is right. Subheads are mentioned here very definitely. As regards Deputy Quinn's complaint against the Minister for Finance, inflation is now growing at such a rate that it is very hard for a Minister at the beginning of the year to say what money he needs for any Department. Unless we can do something about inflation that situation will continue. It is not fair to accuse the Minister of coming in with a false estimate at budget time. Supplementary Estimates have been coming in here every year by agreement. It is obvious that nobody in business can budget accurately, especially in times of inflation. If that was the case we would never have problems. The Board of Works have done a reasonably good job in maintaining the national monuments, schools and so on. Some of their work programmes have to be sanctioned by other Departments, and that causes some delays.
I appeal to the Minister to look for a substantial amount of money particularly in relation to the western drainage package so that when we get more money from the EEC we will be in a position to go ahead with arterial drainage works on the high priority rivers, especially on the Dunkellin river in County Galway which is the worst river in the county. If the Minister does that, both Deputy Donnellan and I will agree that the Minister has done a reasonably good job.
I have a certain amount of sympathy for the Minister and his officials who have to come in here looking for over £6 million. If the truth were known, when the Estimate was originally submitted the Department of Finance at this famous meeting in Barrettstown Castle last January did a certain amount of pruning. That is probably the main reason for such a large shortfall.
Subhead E refers to the large number of buildings and construction works on hands at all stages of progress. Why is subhead E so bald? It does not spell out what is actually going on. Are the Cabinet squatting in Barrettstown Castle at the moment? When I was in the Office of Public Works trustees were appointed pro tem until legislation was introduced for the State to legally acquire Barrettstown Castle. Did the Cabinet squat there last January and will they squat there again next Friday? Have they permission from the trustees to have this meeting in Barrettstown Castle? When the late owner handed this over to the State it was intended to bring in legislation for the State to acquire it. This legislation has not yet come in. It is a disgrace that this situation has been allowed to exist. The Cabinet have no legal right to be there until this castle is legally acquired by the State. The Cabinet are squatting and are encouraging squatting.
This debate is limited, but under subhead E do the works include a new decentralisation policy for the Department of Justice recently announced by the Minister for Labour, and if so is there provision in the Estimate to build new offices in Killarney? Is there any truth in the rumour that the Minister of State is doing his best to ensure that various offices will be decentralised to Tralee instead of to Killarney? It will be most illuminating if the Minister will tell us whether any money was allotted for office development in Killarney. Under this subhead we can speculate as to where offices and so on are to be located and whether work is at planning stage or is in progress. The Minister should give a solemn undertaking to this House that he will not direct the Office of Public Works not to provide land in Killarney, because we have acres of land in Killarney for such decentralisation.
In relation to actual works in progress the situation in Leinster House is ridiculous. It is ludicrous that the bar, having been burned two years, is now only being replaced by a temporary one. We were given an undertaking by the Minister for Finance that he would provide dining facilities for people who work here whether they be the press, the civil servants, the Members of the House or anyone associated with it. It does not impress anybody to see a flurry of workmen around the House today when this Estimate is being discussed, to show that something is happening.
They have been around the House for the past three weeks if the Deputy had opened his eyes.
The Minister is obviously stung. We must be getting close to the bone. This House seems to be completely neglected by the Board of Works. One day the place is hot and the next day it is cold. It is no wonder half of us are coughing, including the Minister of State. I hope that the Committee in charge of the House will sit down with the Minister's officials, for whom I have the greatest respect, and will draw up a proper plan for this House so that at least we will not have gas fires in here today and none tomorrow, cold rooms and a gale of wind blowing in the window. It is a crazy situation. It is a wonder that we have not had more by-elections because of the condition of the House.
We would win them all.
Fianna Fáil won one out of three so far.
It is in order to deal with fuel, light and heat but not by-elections.
Regarding national monuments, I appeal for more goodwill on the part of the Department towards landowners in return for their preservation of these monuments. There is no reason why the Office of Public Works or any agency under their aegis should object to development taking place on such land. I have in mind a particular case where a man who was good enough to provide a road to the national monuments on his land decided to seek planning permission for the erection of two houses for his sons a few hundred yards away. Some agency directly under the OPW objected to the planning permission. I warn the Minister that such actions will not enable the continuation of the co-operation and goodwill of the landowners. Common sense must prevail and if the local authority see no objection to a development I do not see why any outside body should be able to prevent it. If the Minister has any influence with these agencies he should give them a short, snappy lecture on this subject.
The Minister is responsible for many offices throughout the country. I would appeal to him to get a fire officer's report on every office used by the OPW. Any shortcomings in premises rented or owned by OPW should be rectified.
Has the Minister any proposals for the dredging of Dingle harbour? I am sure he is aware of the difficulties there because, although I might disagree with his policies, he is certainly in touch with the grassroots. He must be aware of the grave damage being done to 60-foot trawlers when trying to land at Dingle pier. These boats are constantly in need of repair. Possibly the Minister will be told by his officials that the necessary work is the statutory function of Kerry County Council.
The Deputy knows that this is the case.
If it is a statutory function of the local authority it should not be raised here.
If I am out of order I will genuflect to your ruling.
There is no need to genuflect as long as the ruling is obeyed.
Kerry County Council signed an agreement with the OPW, as a result of which the OPW have an obligation to take the county council to court to make them honour their commitment. This is where the matter becames relevant. The situation cannot last much longer as far as these trawlers are concerned. I appeal to the Minister to use his power, limited as it is by lack of cash, to make sure that something is done to relieve the anguish and distress of Dingle fishermen.
Subhead E deals with building and construction works in hands and at all stages of progress and almost £3 million is being sought. Is there any provision in this sum for work to prevent coast erosion at Magharees? The Minister pushed this matter very hard before taking up his present office. In reply to a parliamentary question he told me he was waiting for an order to be made and laid the blame on Kerry County Council, although they had nothing to do with it. The order had to be made by the Department of Transport and it was months before they decided to move. I hope there is some allocation for the unfortunate people in Magharees.
Coast protection comes under a different heading.
This subhead concerns new works, alterations and additions.
Coast protection works do not come under subhead E. They should be dealt with under subhead I.
The information I have is that new works, alterations and additions come under subhead E.
The Deputy should listen to the Chair for a moment. I am not telling him he cannot debate it. He can debate it under subhead I because it is coast protection.
It is not under subhead I, because there is no money allocated specifically for it. A sum of £2,720,000 has been allocated for new works, alterations and additions. I hope the Minister has some money put aside for Magharees. We never know when a south-west gale will blow and these people will be cut off from the mainland, unable to move either up or down unless they travel on the back of a donkey. I appeal to the Minister to put the same energy into that project as he put into it when he was a backbench Deputy in the Fianna Fáil Party.
I will not delay the House much longer because I see Deputy Tully is rearing to go. I appeal to the Minister to take the Cabinet out of the embarrassing position they are in, to stop them squatting for the second time in Barrettstown Castle. A solemn undertaking was given that legislation would be introduced so that Barrettstown Castle could be taken over by the State. This has not been done. The trustees of the castle are not being asked if they use it; the Cabinet are just walking in. I hope that when the Cabinet go to Barrettstown Castle tomorrow they will tell the Office of Public Works to legalise the present situation. I cannot condone squatting, and for the Cabinet to squat in Barrettstown Castle is ridiculous in the extreme.
There is a more serious aspect of Barrettstown Castle. If they do not own it they cannot shut out latecomers.
They are spending money on it.
They will lock the doors and keep them out but the owner would be entitled to open the doors and let them in.
I have noticed the large number of Supplementary Estimates which have been coming before this House. The budget early in the year estimated a certain expenditure but that seems to have gone completely screwy. Since the House will give the money asked for in these Supplementary Estimates I would like to know how some of this money is being spent. There is a reference here to a saving and the Minister's brief should have contained details of where that saving will occur. Perhaps in his reply he might let us have that information. Some time ago I raised a few points, and I would like some information about them. The Minister gave his solemn promise about one or two of them, but it does not appear as if this promise was carried out. I am not blaming him, but I am bringing this to his notice again because he or his senior officials may not be aware of the fact that there seems to be a peculiar arrangement that the Office of Public Works have certain people to carry out certain works, either on a contract basis or otherwise, or they are supposed to carry them out, and some of them are not doing the jobs they are paid for. There will have to be a tightening up here.
I want to refer to Drogheda Garda station. Has any progress been made to provide a new or alternative Garda station there? Is the Minister aware that since he gave me a guarantee over six months ago that certain work would be carried out, not alone has nothing been done, but work which had been started has not been completed and the station is a disgrace? It is not reasonable that the large number of gardaí in that station should be asked to stay there very much longer.
I mentioned before that the toilet accommodation there — for ban-ghardaí and gardaí — is very primitive. One would expect to see similar facilities in countries where sewerage facilities have not been introduced. The windows have not been cleaned for years, although I understand somebody is paid to do that. No painting has been done, floor covering has not been repaired, fireplaces have fallen out and faulty wiring has fallen from the walls. Because of the importance of that station and the fact that it is on the route to the north and so many people go in and out of it, it is wrong that we should allow this situation to continue.
I deplore the fact that despite the Minister's guarantee not one darn thing has been done. Not a punt has been spent on it since I raised it in this House. The Minister will agree that it is deplorable that his word, given in this House, has been broken. Nobody seems to be bothered about getting the work done. I ask the Minister not just to say that he will have it attended to and something will be done, but I want him to arrange with his officials that the situation will be looked into and find out who did not do what he was told, or if anybody was told. Would one official from the Office of Public Works go to Drogheda and look at the station? If he does, he will see old dirty mattresses and blankets, holes in the floors for toilets and pieces of old, useless and damaged mattresses and furniture thrown into the so-called offices, which are in the cellars. The Minister or his officials may not be aware of the situation, but as of now I blame him and them if the situation is not attended to. As I said, I got a guarantee this would be attended to but nothing has been done. Let somebody look at it now——
That problem is not peculiar to Drogheda alone.
I am interested in Drogheda because I live within two or three miles of it. A number of Garda stations in County Meath require attention. In particular, let me refer to a station in a village called Kilmessan where the living accommodation was to be attended to earlier this year. As far as I know the necessary contracts were laid but nothing has been done. It is not good enough that the Minister should be embarrassed when he comes into this House by Deputies telling him that these situations exist.
I live near Laytown-Bettystown where we have a proposal to have a new Garda station erected. The land has been acquired but no move has been made to have the station erected in this very fast-growing area. It is not enough for somebody to say that land has been acquired and that the station will be built sometime. The Minister should not take that from anybody, but he is the only person who can do anything about it.
The same type of situation arises with regard to courthouses. I do not know if the Minister has been in the courthouses of County Meath and County Louth, which I know fairly well. Some of them are in a deplorable condition.
The Deputy must know we are not responsible for courthouses; the local authorities are. Neither are we responsible for the furnishing of Garda barracks.
Courthouses are the responsibility of the local authorities; Garda barracks are built by the Office of Public Works.
Is the Minister telling me as far as he is concerned if there is a building being used by the Garda which will not fall down, it is adequate accommodation for the gardaí, and responsibility for everything else goes back to the Department of Justice?
Yes, we are not responsible.
So that a rotten floor or floor covering, windows falling out, which have not been cleaned for years, toilet accommodation which consists of a hole in the floor, all of these are the responsibility of the Department of Justice?
We are not responsible for cleaning.
Is it not strange that the Office of Public Works——
We cannot continue in this manner. The Office of Public Works is responsible for Garda stations, for the actual buildings; that is fair enough. Courthouses are the responsibility of local authorities so the Deputy is in order dealing with Garda station buildings under this subhead.
Let me come back to the Garda stations. The cleaning of windows in Garda stations has been carried out by people who were paid by the Office of Public Works. Perhaps that is wrong, it should not have been done, but that has been the score to date. If the Minister tells me they are not entitled to do that, that that is not the way it should be done, then I will take the matter up with the Department of Justice. I want to know also in cases where the windows are in a bad state of repair is that the responsibility of the Office of Public Works or of the Department of Justice? Or, if the floor is rotten, if the general accommodation, stairs and everything else is in bad condition, if the electrical wiring is in bad condition or obsolete are all of these matters for the Office of Public Works or for the Department of Justice? Perhaps the Minister will let me know when he is replying because, if necessary, I can then take my case elsewhere. I am not trying to embarrass the Minister. I am going only on the reply he gave me in this House over six months ago.
Surely the repairs which were to have been carried out to the living acommodation in Kilmessan Garda station are the responsibility of the Office of Public Works. Those repairs were to have been carried out early this year but still have not been done. They cannot be passed on to the Department of Justice. The erection of the Garda station in Laytown is the responsibility of the Office of Public Works also. I shall expect the Minister to make some comment on these points in replying.
I should like now to deal with arterial drainage, particularly the Boyne drainage. As the Minister knows, the Boyne runs right through County Meath, some of its tributaries running into County Cavan. Indeed a portion of the Boyne itself runs into County Kildare. The catchment area is very large. There are four questions I want to raise in this respect. First of all, when any arterial drainage scheme is being planned the onus is on the Office of Public Works to ensure that when they peg or drain a river and say that is included in the catchment there should be no way in which they can at a later stage say it is not included in the catchment, the job will not include that. This happens with fairly monotonous regularity and gives rise to the suggestion that perhaps somebody with a little more pull wants something else done. I have no proof that this is so, but this tends to be the general practice when someone has a drain pegged and finds that the work is not carried out but rather that some other area which he says has not been pegged has been done instead.
My second question has to do with water supplies. I am sick and tired of listening to complaints from people who, when the Office of Public Works undertake a job, have their water supplies cut off, supplies which cost those people very large sums of money. The most recent was one I raised in this House, that at Kilmainham, Kells. As a result of the Blackwater drainage a whole area was left without water, a water scheme which had been in operation for quite some time disappeared overnight. We all agree that the Office of Public Works are doing a great job in regard to arterial drainage. I remember as a small boy the area of Kilmainham being under water for three or four months every year. I assume that will not be the case now, but that is no answer to people who have lost their valuable water supply. The Minister said he would give full co-operation to the group water scheme in the area and indeed to individuals who had to instal their own water supply because they were not included in the scheme. As a matter of fact I almost thought that the Minister himself was going to go straight down and commence working on the scheme so anxious was he to see it done. I met the scheme representative a few days ago, when I was told that that was not so, that the Minister had not yet appeared with his shovel nor had anybody else appeared to give any assistance in the implementation of the scheme. When somebody has been accustomed to having a water supply for a considerable period — particularly if they happen to have a solid fuel system of water heating — they cannot then light a fire, there being then no water in the boiler and they must endeavour to heat the house by some other means. The Minister cannot evade responsibility for ensuring that these people's water supply is maintained. Perhaps he would request the Office of Public Works, when planning future arterial drainage schemes, to carry out a survey of the area, as they map it, to ensure the least possible disruption of water schemes in the area. Indeed he might also arrange that, where possible, such schemes would be augmented in such a way that the people concerned will not be left without water for the best part of a year, as appears to be the case in the Kilmainham area, or even longer.
The Chair takes it that this arises out of the Boyne Drainage Scheme?
The Chair takes it correctly. Otherwise I would not have raised the matter.
Another matter which has caused a great deal of annoyance is a practice which employees of the Office of Public Works have engaged in for some time, what is referred to by local people as despoliating areas, by cutting trees. I cannot understand why mature trees should be cut in this manner when a drainage scheme is being carried out, because these trees formed part of many a beauty spot. It would appear in many cases that they are needlessly cut down merely because leaving them would necessitate going 100 yards further up or down the river with the spoil being taken out of the river. This is causing a lot of annoyance. Now, with so much talk about the environment, surely an arrangement could be made to prevent this happening. What is even worse, the owners of these trees are ignored completely, they are not even told until they notice the trees suddenly being lopped. This is gross discourtesy and should not take place. I am not saying that the Office of Public Works are not doing a good job. They have done a tremendous amount of very valuable work. The best spent money in this country is that on arterial drainage because it reclaims so much land. But, having said that, there is a right and wrong way of doing a job. I believe in many cases it is done the wrong way for want of thought.
Another source of annoyance is the question of spoil on land. I do not know whether there is a particular reason for this. Again and again I get complaints from small farmers who maintain that, for some extraordinary reason, there is more spoil put on their land than on that of very much larger landowners. I believe this is accidental. But there is no way in which it is possible to convince a man who has had an acre of his 20 acres despoiled that his 200 acre farmer neighbour has not been able to work some kind of influence to prevent the spoil being put on his land. When such damage is done the Office of Public Works should make arrangements for compensation, whatever can be agreed, as speedily as possible. I know that such compensation is paid, but the time lag between that damage being done and the payment of compensation is very much longer than it should be. I am asking the Department to ensure that this period will be shortened.
Another pressing concern is St. Mary's Bridge in Drogheda. It is the responsibility of the Office of Public Works. In my time in the Department of Local Government I was able to make arrangements for the building of a bridge, which was a very fine job——
Of course it was.
It should have been done many years before. St. Mary's Bridge should have been rebuilt many years ago but there were problems because it must fit in with new roads and schools and it must also be capable of taking the flood volume of Boyne water. I will illustrate how important the job of rebuilding it is when I say that when demolition was begun the whole darn lot fell into the river and it was lucky several people were not injured or killed. The estimated time for rebuilding is two years. At the moment a Bailey bridge is serving to accommodate pedestrians but everybody else must use the bridge leading on to the Belfast road. On average, people going to work in the mornings are delayed at least half an hour for traffic clearance — and goodness knows jobs are so scarce at the moment that people are anxious to get to work on time. There have been many complaints each day about minor accidents. In the evenings, and at midday, the traffic congestion becomes worse. I am asking the Minister to try to have the rebuilding schedule speeded up. At the moment it is thought the new bridge will not be completed before late 1982 or perhaps 1983. That is far too long.
There are two other matters I wish to refer to. On the part of the east coast that I am concerned with we do not suffer too much from erosion. We went to the Minister's predecessor, Deputy Wyse, and a considerable sum of money was allocated to remedy coast erosion damage, including the saving of a number of houses from being washed away. However, there are many minor works which need attention and which at this time would cost very little but which in a couple of years, when there is another Government in power, could become very expensive.
I should like to deal with the accommodation position in Leinster House. I do not argue that work is not being done — we see it being done from day to day. However, the accommodation here is terribly limited. As far as my party are concerned we have less accommodation than we had in 1954. I do not know why that should be because in the meantime there have been big additions, but individually we seem to have less room. The Minister will have to do something to arrange more accommodation. All parliament buildings throughout the world, to my knowledge, have been extending accommodation, particularly for elected members, and it is galling for elected Members of this House to find such lack of accommodation.
Members of the Labour Party here find themselves six or seven to a relatively small room while officers in adjacent rooms have individual accommodation. I do not wish to be taken as saying that officers of the House are not efficient but I say that the Office of Public Works have lost their priorities completely.
The Minister must look at the whole situation and arrange that those of us who want to work here will have accommodation that will enable us to deal with the matters that come before us. At the moment that is not possible: how can it be possible to carry on a pressing telephone conversation while somebody is typing a few feet away? The Minister must attend to this as quickly as possible.
At the same time I should like to comment on the accommodation for the junior staff in Leinster House. The present position is not what one would expect in a House of Parliament and it does not bear comparison with the situation outside in the city. Indeed I would go so far as to say that the accommodation here does not comply with legal requirements. The Minister in charge of the Office of Public Works is the man responsible and I ask him to rearrange the priorities in this respect and not to continue to have the matter left in the hands of civil servants.
I am not complaining about the way the Office of Public Works are doing their job — it is easy enough to criticise a Department or a section of a Department — but if Governments come and go the business of a Department will continue and it is essential that proper accommodation be provided in the seat of Parliament. In other words, I am asking that the necessary money be provided, at the same time not advocating vast allocations of money. When the Minister is replying I hope he will have some information for us in this respect and if he has not, that he will let us have written information in a reasonable time. I have made the representations and it is now a matter of record, which can be checked.
This Supplementary Estimate covers one of the most wide-ranging sections of any Department in the State. It is not an office that gets enough of the headlines, although it affects the livelihoods of many people. I want to refer particularly to arterial drainage, one of the most important matters to be discussed here. In the context of this Supplementary Estimate and its reference to arterial drainage we are only talking about buttons.
Borrowing has gone out of bounds but money will have to be found quickly for arterial drainage. In my area recently we had massive flooding of three of our towns. The Minister has agreed to meet a deputation this evening but people from that area find that the River Blackwater is only No. 22 on the list to be drained. I appeal to him to give priority to the Blackwater because of the damage caused to property by flooding.
I allow the Deputy to mention the Blackwater because I allowed two Deputies to mention the Dunkillen but there is nothing in this Supplementary Estimate for the Blackwater or Dunkillen.
I mentioned the Blackwater as part of the programme for arterial drainage.
The amount allowed under Subhead G. 2 covers five or six rivers which were mentioned in the Minister's brief.
I am telling him that he should put in another one. Surely I am entitled to come into the House and say that, in view of what has happened over the last five or six weeks. It is a legitimate point.
That is all right but the Chair has its rules and obligations to go by. This is a Supplementary Estimate. On the main Estimate the Deputy can argue everything under the sun relevant to the Board of Works.
I do not want to bring in everything. I am making that one point about one river. I will not mention the river any more. It should get priority because of what has happened quite recently. It goes into the Minister's constituency. Great damage was caused to stock and property by the flooding. I appeal to the Minister to give special consideration to this even if it means bringing in a further Supplementary Estimate.
The money spent in the Youghal area on coast protection is money well spent. It has proved very satisfactory to use large quarry stones. I would like to see an extension of this to protect all the beaches in the Red Barn-Youghal area. Work will have to be continued for several miles along that beach but it is money well spent. The coast protection of Ballycotton has got widespread publicity in the media but so far nothing has been done. The public roadway is now in danger. I hope that this will be covered in the extra money provided for coastal protection. People might say that this is not the time of the year to carry out this work but as the need is so great I believe the Minister should get to work quickly on coast protection. I compliment the Minister on what has already been done in this area. I believe that it was because of the ingenuity of local engineers that large stones were used on the beaches in this area. It is providing very good protection.
We should think again about our Garda stations, now that there is so much violence and the danger to people living in remote areas. I appeal to the Minister to consider that when they are contemplating closing a station in a small area because of its condition it is more important to see that the station will be put in good order and made habitable for the people who occupy it 24 hours a day. Rural stations can do a lot in restoring law and order because the gardaí know the local people. Very little crime occurs in such areas. There is no point in trying to serve all of East-Cork from one station.
A lot of work is going on in the Office of Public Works in relation to schools and extensions to them. However, there seems to be unusual lethargy in the Department about Upper Aghada School where there are a lot of what I would descibe as hen houses and prefabs waiting for a decent extension. I hope the Minister will get on with that job as soon as possible.
I believe that if national monuments were dealt with properly it would be one of the most important areas in the Department. All we have done in those places is to put up signs to say that there is a castle or some other building there. When one proceeds further in most of those cases one finds that there is a dangerous building there. Children play around those dangerous buildings. I believe that the Council of Europe are getting very interested in our archaeological treasures. We have set up a committee to protect and look after our heritage in this respect, but this will mean spending money. In the case of Barry's Castle near Carrigtwohill, the old cathedral in Cloyne and round towers, a lot of money must be spent. In the case of Cloyne Cathedral we are talking about helping out the Church of Ireland who will not be able to maintain that massive cathedral without help from the Office of Public Works. What would the Americans give for a round tower or a Cloyne Cathedral? They can only go back as far as the Alamo and Davy Crockett.
I am very pleased that in Dublin an effort is being made to retain our Georgian buildings and where possible to restore them. It is not generally known that in Athens and other places in Greece the restoration work is as a result of a lot of money being spent. Perhaps it is fortunate that they got other countries to come in to help them. Unfortunately we will have to do the work ourselves. It is an economic proposition in relation to the interest tourists have in those buildings. I am ashamed to admit that I did not even know of the existence of an old ruin which some tourists asked me to show to them. They discovered this in some old document. We had difficulty in locating it. We had to wade through all sorts of things to get to it. It was in very bad condition. Money should be found for this work. In estimates of millions nowadays, £1,000 would go a long way towards making those buildings safe. We are not talking about removing them or anything of that nature. We are asking only that they be made safe, that there be reasonable access to them and that any relevant literature be made available to the public.
There is reference to the purchase of equipment for arterial drainage. This is a matter that I have raised here before. I am convinced that the most efficient way of dealing with arterial drainage is to use the contractors. In the Munster area generally there are contractors who have massive equipment which is lying idle. These people would be only too willing to carry out the very essential work that is necessary if the Department would give the go-ahead. Because of the availability of so much equipment, there is no need to spend money on buying new equipment. The reason for the existing equipment being idle is that agriculture is in the doldrums. Contractors would be prepared to submit very keen quotations and they would do a first-class job.
Regarding courthouses, town halls and such buildings, much good work has been done but the condition of some of the buildings leaves much to be desired. All too often we hear of district justices adjourning courts because of lack of heating and bad conditions generally in the buildings. Such a situation should not arise in this day and age. The job of a district justice is tough enough without his having to sit through an all-day session in the chilling atmosphere of a courthouse. Perhaps the situation is reflected in some of the severe sentences that are imposed towards evening. A district justice would have difficulty in maintaining his equilibrium in an atmosphere that is unpleasant and cold.
The Deputy is talking about work that is the responsibility of the local authorities.
There is reference here to an additional sum to meet the cost of works in relation to the repair of courthouses.
That is because the county council concerned failed in their responsibility to provide a courthouse.
So far as the county councils are concerned there is not enough money to fill the potholes in the road, let alone to provide courthouses. There is no point in expecting Cork County Council either to provide or to repair courthouses. We are not in the position of doing the job that we are commissioned to do, that is, to issue county council loans to deserving people. I had a very sad case this morning of a group of people to whom we were even unable to send letters. In these circumstances there is no point in talking to us about building courthouses. I hope that the money being voted in this respect will be used effectively and that it will be distributed fairly. We shall be expecting to receive a fair share of it.
The Office of Public Works have no function in that matter.
The reference is to the Waterford Courthouse only.
I make no apology for talking about the importance of arterial drainage. Throughout the country farm modernisation schemes are being held up because of failure to drain the various rivers. This situation has several effects. As well as the farmers being denied substantial grants, large areas of land remain incapable of being used. These are lands that could be made fertile as a result of drainage.
So far as the Blackwater is concerned, we are Number 22 on the list of priorities. Apart altogether from the recent serious flooding of that river, there is the best of Irish land being flooded constantly in the area. As I have said, both the manpower and the equipment are available for such works.
Another positive factor of arterial drainage is that there is very valuable sand and gravel removed from the rivers. This is an aspect that we tend to overlook. With modern equipment these deposits can be extracted and used in the building industry. At a time when there is so much unemployment and when we are running all over the place appealing to new industrialists to set up here, we have the means of creating employment while at the same time carrying out very valuable work in the form of arterial drainage. From the Minister's constituency right down to Youghal there is a need for these works in order to protect the people in the towns along the Blackwater from being flooded out as well as to provide valuable land. It was a miracle that lives were not lost in the recent flooding of the river but I appeal to the Minister to give special consideration to the Blackwater in view of what has happened.
It is all right talking in terms of millions of pounds but many of these millions only account for inflation. Surely another £1 or £2 million could be found to carry out the very essential work that I am talking about. We must start at the Youghal side and work our way gradually from there as funds become available. This work is very important if we are to make the various towns safe. We do not wish to see again whole shop fronts in towns such as Kanturk, Fermoy, Mallow or Midleton being washed away. Neither do we wish to experience again the sight of people wading through the water in the dead of night or of old people being taken from their homes at night. Neither do we wish to see again dead animals dangling from the tree tops as was the case during the recent flooding. I came into the House especially today to appeal to the Minister to give priority to the draining of the Blackwater.
I thank those Deputies who have contributed to the debate. Deputy Quinn referred to the increase of 1.3 per cent in the original Estimate for 1980 compared with the Estimate for 1979. The relevant increase in the Estimate in relation to the outlay is in gross figures; the increase in gross figures for 1980 as compared with 1979 is 10 per cent. It is necessary because of the progress of the work.
Deputy Donnellan mentioned the barriers at both gates of Leinster House. A contract for the maintenance of the traffic control barriers has been placed with a firm for a number of years but the delay in repairing the barriers was not because of a delay in payment of an account but was due to a difference of opinion between the Office of Public Works and the contractor doing the work.
Is that why they did not come back to repair them?
The account has been paid and the matter has been settled. I am sure the Deputy will be glad to know that maintenance work has started. Deputy Donnellan and Deputy Tully spoke about the accommodation in Leinster House. We accept that the accommodation is limited and the Department are doing their best to improve the situation. We are trying to get the College of Art to move to another premises and arrangements for that move are on the way.
Is it the intention of the Minister——
The Deputy may not ask questions at this stage. The Minister should be allowed to continue without interruption.
I should like to inform Deputies that we are not responsible for the installation of telephones in Leinster House. Neither are we responsible for the provision of typewriters or stationery which was mentioned by some Deputies.
Deputy Donnellan mentioned the Oughterard Garda station and this matter was highlighted in the press recently. My Department have been looking for a suitable site for a new Garda station for several years. A number of sites regarded as suitable were examined but the Office of Public Works were not successful in bringing negotiations to a satisfactory conclusion. Towards the end of last year my Department purchased a former Church of Ireland rectory. However, extensive adaptation and development works were necessary to make the building suitable as a Garda divisional headquarters. A scheme was prepared by my Department and the first phase of the work is being carried out. It is expected it will be finished early in 1981. The second phase is a much larger scheme and will include the building of an extension which will be carried out when the gardaí are in occupation. The proposal for the main scheme is with the local authority for planning permission. The Office of Public Works are looking for alternative premises as temporary accommodation for the gardaí. We hope to get something in the near future.
Deputy Tully mentioned the Garda station at Drogheda. It is accepted that this station is inadequate and the Office of Public Works have been looking for a suitable building or site to replace it. They have not yet got a suitable site or alternative. Two prefabricated offices have been provided at the station and they are almost ready for occupation. We are waiting for telephones to be installed; it is the job of the gardaí to ensure they are provided as soon as possible. When the staff move into the prefabricated offices the additional toilets will be provided. I should like to inform Deputies that the Office of Public Works are not responsible for cleaning windows in Garda stations or for providing blankets.
Deputy Tully spoke about a new bridge to be erected which would be known as St. Mary's Bridge, Drogheda. I should like to inform the House that a contract has been placed for this bridge.
There were many contributions from Deputies on the subject of arterial drainage. I agree that much work must be carried out in this area. My Department are doing their best to ensure that it is done as quickly as possible. Deputy Donnellan and Deputy Callanan spoke about the Dunkellin river. Design work on this project is in progress at present.
When will it be finished?
Some time in the near future.
Next year?
The next stage is the cost benefit analysis. In view of existing commitments it will be some considerable time before work commences.
Are the personnel available to carry out the analysis?
The Deputy may not ask the Minister questions at this time. He should allow him to continue without interruption.
Some Deputies referred to the Cregg river. Because of bad weather there was flooding of this river. Engineers from the Office of Public Works discussed the matter recently with local farmers. They are investigating the possibility of alleviating the flooding as far as possible under the drainage maintenance scheme. However, it should be noted that there cannot be 100 per cent immunity against flooding——
Would the Minister go along with my suggestion about moving the silt downstream?
Please allow the Minister to continue his speech.
Some Deputies spoke about equipment for drainage work. My Department have expensive equipment. We do not think it would be possible to hire equipment to carry out arterial drainage work. The equipment is very expensive and my Department have all the equipment that is available.
