Deputy Calleary has been given permission to raise on the Adjournment the unease and dissatisfaction felt by members of the staff of the drainage section of the Office of Public Works in relation to the rumours which continue to persist about the disbandment of that section. He has 20 minutes.
Adjournment Debate. - Office of Public Works.
A Cheann Chomhairle, first of all, I would like to thank you for the opportunity of raising on the Adjournment this very important and far reaching matter and I have with your permission agreed to allocate five minutes to Deputy O'Kennedy who also has an interest in this problem.
I have tried for the last few weeks to seek information from the Dáil, where I attempted some time ago to raise this matter on the Adjournment but I was unsuccessful, and from the office of the Minister of State. While I suspected that there were changes in the offing I must admit that I was not prepared for the very far reaching decisions — I emphasise the word "decisions" because that is the word which was used in the reply which was given today to Deputy De Rossa — which had been taken and which were conveyed in the reply to Deputy De Rossa's written question which he put down today.
Four years ago the Government promised us open government. They promised a Government of consultation and discussion. What has happened since? We have a Government by stealth and a Government prepared to make major changes in three or four Government Departments without any consultation with the staff or with the Dáil.
It is only three weeks since the Supplementary Estimate for the Office of Public Works was discussed in this House. At that time the Minister of State did not see fit to indicate that there were major changes in the offing and in all probability that this was the last Estimate which would be introduced for the Office of Public Works even though I see another Supplementary Estimate passing through. In effect, he was announcing the wake of the Office of Public Works. One could pose the question whether the marine works section will now be transferred to the Department of Fisheries. Already, the education section, the section which was concerned with school building, of the Office of Public Works has been transferred to the Department of Education.
I am disappointed that I was not given the information that I sought. It appears that Fianna Fáil Deputies, Government backbench Deputies, Ministers and Ministers of State made calls but they received the same answer, that no changes were envisaged in the various sections of the Office of Public Works, particularly the section concerned with maintenance. The implications of the Government's decision are in essence the abolition of the Office of Public Works. If one takes the answer which was given today at face value it means that local authorities will be asked in future to contribute towards new drainage schemes in addition to paying for maintenance afterwards. It means also that farmers will have to contribute to new schemes and their maintenance.
Again, the Government have created another revenue collector but this time they are asking committees who in many areas have been set up to help monitor drainage schemes to be the new revenue collectors. These committees are now going to have the task of collecting revenue for the new drainage schemes.
The good news in the reply which was given to Deputy De Rossa today was that responsibility for paying for arterial drainage maintenance will be transferred from the local authorities to the Department of Agriculture. Just in case the local authorities thought they were going to receive a rebate from the Government one has only to read paragraph 16 of the reply which says the proposals mean a transfer of responsibility for arterial drainage maintenance from the local authorities to the Department of Agriculture and that the annual amount required by the Department of Agriculture for maintenance — here is the rub — will be deducted from the rates support grant of the Department of the Environment Vote. Arrears payable by local authorities to the Office of Public Works — here is an even greater rub — for maintenance works carried out in the past will also be deducted from the rates support grant. The period over which the arrears will be payable will be settled in consultation with the Department of the Environment.
They have nothing now and they will have less then.
The Deputy should not interrupt.
That is the position with regard to the Owenmore in County Sligo. One might ask what about the Mulcair in County Tipperary and County Limerick? Once the new criteria are put into operation will all the work which has been carried out on both these rivers have to be redone? The reply stated that future arterial drainage schemes will be undertaken on the basis of the revised criteria agreed with the Department of Finance and following formal consultation with the Minister for Tourism, Fisheries and Forestry. What will happen to the staff in the various offices while this work is going on?
There are also suggestions that the merits of carrying out works by contract rather than by direct labour will be assessed to ensure that works are carried out as cheaply as possible. That is a very good suggestion but the reality is, and I am sure the Minister of State who has been involved in drainge for many years would agree, that in this area there is no way contract work can be cheaper than direct labour. My information is that cross-sections on the main channels in particular are done only every 100 yards. From my limited experience in this matter if work such as this was to be prepared so that it could go out on contract these cross-sections would have to be taken at approximately 25ft. so as to give the contractor a picture of the river bottom. It is easy to see why the staff in the various offices are becoming extremely worried about the situation now existing.
What will be the cost of supervision of these schemes? One can imagine the cartels which will be set up because there are very few contractors who have the necessary equipment to carry out the main drainage schemes. There are only one or two contractors who can carry out schemes on the Shannon, on the Mulcair or on the Owenmore. Can the Minister of State now explain the position of the existing staff on maintenance work? The only reference to the staff and their future in the reply is that the necessary action in regard to staffing in the Office of Public Works and in the Department of Agriculture as a result of these decisions will be examined immediately by an interdepartmental committee. I understand that that committee met today. The reply at paragraph 17 also states that it is intended that the staffing consequences of these decisions — I note the word "decisions"— will be examined by an inter-departmental committee in which the Departments of the Public Service, Finance and Agriculture and the Office of Public Works will be represented.
It is an indication of the Government's contempt for the consultative process that major and far reaching decisions such as these can be taken without any consultation with the unions involved or with those who are directly involved in this skilled work. From reading the reply one would think that no studies or cost analysis benefit has been carried out up to now. I ask once again what will be the position of the staff?
Long before this answer was given, the staff had an idea of what was involved. What will be their position in relation to maintenance work under these new criteria? It will take months for each channel to be examined on the basis of these criteria. What will be the situation in an area which badly needs drainage but where small farmers will not be able to contribute? The Minister of State is well aware than many farmers have no money to contribute towards maintenance work or new drainage schemes.
Paragraph 13 of the reply, dealing with contract work, is nothing but a slander on the engineering and professional staff of the Office of Public Works. It is, to say the least, a stretching of the truth. It states:
The carrying out of arterial drainage works by direct labour makes cost control difficult as variations in the duration of projects can be made too easily.
I am sure the Minister of State has been involved in trying to get extra channels done and he must know the difficulty of adding extra work to any drainage scheme. Very strict criteria already exist and the final decision is a political one made by the Minister of State at the Office of Public Works or by the Minister for Finance. It was always a political decision, made after a cost-benefit analysis.
One of the most deplorable suggestions in the reply is that schemes might be abandoned. This is typical of a Government whose inaction, bad judgment and cowardice on the European scene has brought agriculture to its knees. These proposals will penalise further farmers who are in many cases heavily in debt. The whole exercise is an indication of the Government's move towards a new alliance, further away from their companions in Coalition towards new bed-fellows. It is another indication that what Senator Flor O'Mahony said this morning was correct. Fine Gael are preparing an election platform that will take them far away from their Labour partners.
The implications for local authorities are unbelievable. The proposals will mean a transfer of responsibility for arterial drainage maintenance from local authorities to the Department of Agriculture. In effect, the Department of Agriculture will get the money from the Department of the Environment, who will deduct if from the grants to local authorities, who are already completely under-financed. Local authorities will be relieved of the statutory demand from the Office of Public Works but will have the cost deducted from grants paid to them by the Department of the Environment. When will legislation be introduced to make the necessary changes in the Act covering arterial drainage or changes in the statutory demands on local authorities?
The rumour that maintenance is being reduced next year to £2 million from approximately £6.5 million this year must now be given credence in view of the accuracy with which various offices were able to anticipate the reply to this question. There will be a drastic reduction in maintenance staff and it means that offices like Ballina and Headford will have their personnel greatly reduced. There is grave dissatisfation and unease along the western seaboard regarding what is to happen. It is little wonder that the Union of Professional and Technical Civil Servants are calling an extraordinary general meeting in Dublin on 17 December. People in the arterial drainage offices feel unwanted and cast aside after years of loyal service in a job for which they have a special expertise. How can the Minister of State explain away lack of consultation with the unions in this case?
To be debating at this hour of the night a decision of such far reaching consequences is a total abuse of this House.
Is the Deputy suggesting that the Chair——
I am very complimentary to the Chair. In my years in this House I have never experienced a Government proposal of such far reaching and drastic consequences coming in a written reply to a Parliamentary Question. The rest of us would not have been aware of the contents of this reply were it not for the diligence of my colleague, Deputy Calleary, and also Deputy Treacy, who has been following this matter for so long. In effect, the Office of Public Works is being abolished as far as arterial drainage is concerned. It is outrageous that this "open" Government should attempt to pass this through a written reply. Reaction among the public will demonstrate how they feel.
One of the conseqences is that existing arterial drainage schemes on the priority list of the Office of Public Works will be abandoned. The first project on the priority list happens to be the Mulcair River in my constituency and the constituency of East Limerick. Just when this project has reached top priority we are told that the schemes at planning stage or on the OPW priority list, and the Shannon, will be for reassessment by the Minister for Agriculture in the objective manner proposed in the review; but existing schemes, will, of course, be continued to completion. Are we supposed to say "thanks"? That is the end of the Mulcair River drainage programme. What will replace it? When a new programme is set up under the Minister for Agriculture the farmers will be allowed to make a contribution themselves — farmers benefit from drainage, so from now on farmers pay for drainage. That is the thanks they get for all their representations and efforts. I want to give the Minister some idea of the ability of these farmers to pay. In Newport, which has been devastated by flooding, milk production is down 16 per cent this year, while feed costs are up 40 per cent. In Cappaghmore milk production is down 11.3 per cent and feed costs are up 31 per cent. Yet these are the farmers who are to be asked to contribute to the cost of drainage. It is an outrageous decision.
We know about the Department of Agriculture and the drainage problems in Tipperary. We have the Ballyfinboy river in North Tipperary. Because the Minister has totally and utterly failed to pay adequate sums for the drainage of that river and the Suir, what will happen when one adds the Mulcair river to the list? This is a sad day. It is a outrageous breach of parliamentary democracy that this announcement should be made in that fashion. The Government will hear an awful lot more about it.
Hear, hear.
The Minister for Finance to-day in a written reply to question from Deputy De Rossa informed the House that the Government had made a number of decisions affecting arterial drainage. The main thrust of the decisions is to assign reponsibility for arterial drainage to the Minister for Agriculture as, in the Government's view, he is in the best position to judge the efficacy of drainage in the context of overall agricultural policy. One of the decisions taken is that an interdepartmental committee will consider the staffing conseqences of the transfer and, in fact, this committee held its first meeting to-day.
Does the Minister of State agree with the Minister for Agriculture?
Notification of the Government's announcement is being conveyed to the various unions representing the staff.
Construction works on three major arterial drainage schemes were completed this year, namely, the Boyne, the Maigue and the Corrib-Mask and of necessity the numbers employed were reduced as the scheme wound down. Three other schemes are, however, being continued to completion. They are the Boyle, the Bonet and the Monaghan Blackwater.
How coincidental.
God help the Mulcair and the Suir rivers.
Some 260 men are employed on these schemes. In addition, planning of new schemes for the Mulcair. the Owenmore, the Suir and the Dunkellin rivers which had been in abeyance. has been resumed and is proceeding since August of this year.
At what speed?
Will they be the responsibility of the Department of Agriculture?
Completed schemes must be maintained, however, and at present 365 men are employed on a permanent basis for this work.
There is nothing in the Government decision to warrant the suggestion that the drainage section, at present in the Office of Public Works, will be disbanded. As this announcement was made only a few hours ago it would be premature to discuss the matter in more detail this evening.
The Dáil adjourned at 11.25 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 10 December 1986.