Deputy Johnson has raised a great storm in a teacup with reference to this estimate. If the only evidence he has on which to base his claim that I am falling foul of public policy, is the conduct of an auditor of my department in giving expression to an opinion that a certain wage was too high. I think that he has established a very poor case. This auditor has not even surcharged. Even if he had surcharged in this particular case, and assuming that he had done an injustice in doing so—which has not been conclusively proved to me—I do not think it would be very much to go on, for I would have still the right to remit the surcharge, and there would be the same right of applying in the High Court. On the whole, it is quite a hypothetical case to be making such a pother about. I have never discussed policy with an auditor or influenced the decisions of auditors in matters of this kind in any way. Like all other human beings they are liable to make mistakes, and I have no doubt that if this auditor has made a mistake in this particular case a wholesome public opinion will be brought to bear upon him, and will influence him to adopt better conduct in the future. Deputy Johnson has raised a point about two auditors who have been loaned from my department and, incidentally, he has, by innuendo, suggested that the auditors of my department are not all that is to be desired as regards the performance of their duties.
COMMITTEE ON FINANCE. - DEBATE ON ESTIMATES RESUMED.
took the Chair at this stage.
I do not want the Minister to be under a wrong impression. My suggestion was—if you like, my innuendo was—that the work was no longer so great as to call for the attention of such a staff, and that therefore the maladministration of local authorities was not evident, because the auditors could be spared for other departments.
I might say that these auditors could be ill spared, and they were only loaned to the Exchequer and Audit department because the services of very experienced men were required. It is a new department and had no staff to deal with the important matters that came before it. It was for that reason these auditors were lent. At the present time we are understaffed as regards auditors. The position as regards the audit is that from the local elections of January and July, 1920, the activities of the then Local Government auditors ceased. Early in 1921 the Dáil Ministry appointed a staff of four auditors to scrutinise the accounts of local authorities. These auditors could not conduct a legal audit, and the difficulties of the time were such that it was impossible for them to make a stay of more than a day or two in one place. The position at the date of the Truce was that there were all round arrears of two years in the accounts of local authorities, as well as very considerable arrears prior to that, in some areas. After the Truce two of the four auditors employed by the Dáil Ministry resigned on political grounds and a new staff was recruited, which has since been dealing with the accounts of public authorities. A great deal of extra work was thrown on the staff owing to the amalgamation schemes which necessitated the winding up of all the union accounts, and the transfer of assets and liabilities to the county councils, as well as the necessary adjustment as between one area and another comprised in the former union area. The present position as regards audits is: Union accounts in the majority of the counties are finally closed; rural district councils are approximately two half years in arrear; urban councils are approximately 12 months in arrear; county councils are approximately 12 months in arrear. It is anticipated that during the financial year all the accounts of local authorities will be brought up to date.
I want to refer to (d) "Travelling, etc., of Auditors," which, I am glad to say, as far as I have the expenditure before me, shows that it has been reduced by about £700. I was going to call attention to the fact that in the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General on Travelling and Subsistence Charges, he says:—
"My examination of the accounts disclosed an appreciable number of cases in which I was not satisfied that the claims made by public officers for travelling and subsistence expenses were reasonable and necessary. In addition, many unvouched charges for travelling were included in the accounts, and claims for car hire were submitted without details of the actual journeys undertaken."
He finishes up at the bottom by saying:—
"I have instructed my officers to scrutinise all claims for travelling and subsistence expenses appearing in the accounts for the financial year 1923-24, and I hope to be able to report more favourably next year."
I have already stated that, in my opinion, these accounts require to be more carefully looked into than in the past. I am satisfied with regard to this, now that the Comptroller and Auditor-General, at all events, is going to see that there are vouchers for travelling. I maintain, however, that the travelling expenses are on far too high a level for the amount of work that is done.
As to H (2), "Telegrams and Telephones," there is a considerable expansion in this item, from £372 in 1923-24 to £560. Is that owing to some extension of the telephone system?
That is a Post Office estimate.
This item of telegrams and telephones will be continually cropping up. On looking over the accounts I was impressed by the enormous cost attributed to this service. As roughly as I could make it up, it comes to £26,000 for telegrams and telephones in the various Departments.
I think we are entitled to a little more explanation than that given by the Minister. There is an increase of nearly 80 per cent. on this item. The tendency exists, and has always existed, in Government offices, to send a telegram when a letter could be written. That must be checked by the responsible Minister, and unless the Dáil makes it plain that Ministers have got to check it, it will not be done. It is all very well to say that it is putting the money from one pocket into another, and that the Postmaster-General gets it, but it means keeping up an unnecessary staff. The Postmaster-General has to employ a staff that he would not otherwise require. These telegrams are mostly sent from Dublin, and it means that in the Dublin offices more telegraphists have to be employed than would otherwise be needed. We have an absolute right to an explanation from the Minister as to why there is an increase of 80 per cent. on this estimate, and why it is anticipated that there will be a still greater expenditure under this heading.
This is a Post Office estimate, and my Department is not responsible for it. At the present time every possible check is being applied in my Department. I think business men have found that in the long run it pays to communicate by telegraph rather than by letter. We get a great many complaints from time to time about delay in answering correspondence and things of that kind. Matters are continually cropping up which do not brook any delay, where we have to intervene at the earliest possible moment, such as the Letterkenny strike and other similar matters when certain emergencies arise, and where the telegraph or telephone must be used.
Will the Minister tell us who are entitled to frank telegrams in his Department? I am not referring now to telephones. Do telegrams have to go to the Secretary, or how many officers have the right to send telegrams on their own initiative? That is rather an important point.
I understand that this privilege, or right, is confined to a limited number of heads of Departments. It is not a right that is given to every clerk.
When the Minister states that this is a Post Office charge, in answer to Deputy Hewat's complaint that there had been an increase, are we to infer that there may not have been actually an increase in the use of telephones and telegrams but that the Minister thinks that the Post Office is entering a charge in excess of what might have been the case, because Deputy Hewat has drawn attention to the fact that there has been a very considerable increase, and the answer to that was that this is a Post Office charge? Is the Post Office charge commensurate with the increase, or is it not?
It is an estimate.
What I meant to suggest is that it is for the Post Office to estimate what our expenditure will be in this matter, that we ourselves do not make this estimate.
Does the Minister accept the Post Office estimate without checking it? That would seem to me rather unbusinesslike.
I assume we check it, but not for the purpose of making the estimate.
In connection with sub-head K, grants to voluntary hospitals in respect of duty on spirits, that was an item in the Estimates last year, and when I asked the Minister about it he promised to let me know, but I am still in ignorance about it.
I am not quite sure, but the money has been re-voted. It has not been spent.
I want to congratulate the Minister on the increased expenditure that has taken place in connection with Child Welfare and Schools for Mothers. The amount expended last year was greatly in excess of the Estimate, and I am glad to see that the Ministry is estimating for a larger expenditure now. I do not think money could be better spent than in this direction.
Can the Minister give us a little enlightenment on this? I, too, am full of faith that this is an improvement, and that the Estimate of £3,500 over and above that of last year indicates an extension of the work, but I think it would be well to have from the Minister some information respecting this work and where the increase arises. What extensions have there been, either in the number of places where the work is carried on, or increased activities in the places where it has been carried on hitherto? I think that the Minister would be well advised to give us some enlightenment on this matter and to justify the increase. I am quite sure that he can do so, and I think it would do something to rehabilitate him in the good graces of some of the Deputies.
As a matter of fact the Estimate for last year was £7,000 and the amount spent was £12,879, so that the expenditure had run up at a tremendous rate during the year, and the Estimate now is for something in the neighbourhood of £800 more than the actual expenditure that took place during last year. It is quite evident that the Minister has no idea that there will be the same extension of this work during the coming year as took place during last year, when the expenditure was £5,870 more than the Estimate. If the expansion were to take place on the same scale as last year we should require an Estimate of something like £18,000. I shall be very glad, with Deputy Johnson, to hear in what direction this expansion has taken place.
At present this whole question of medical treatment of school children and child welfare schemes is more or less limping with a halt, as somebody referred to local government in Ireland some days ago, and until the Local Government Bill goes through I am afraid we will not be able to do anything very comprehensive in the way of giving the necessary support to this very desirable object which, I am glad to say, all Deputies are in sympathy with.
In its broader aspect the Maternity and Child Welfare grant may be vindicated by a recent pronouncement of an eminent authority:—"The health of mothers and children is quite fundamental. It lies at the basis of all public health and of all true national wellbeing." In its local application the grant provides for a helpless section of the community, affording trained nursing services for attendance and for instruction, medical advice and hospital treatment, nourishing food for the necessitous and institutional or other maintenance for those deprived of parental care. The interval of seven years since the grant was introduced has witnessed a marked and well sustained reduction in infant mortality, most notably affecting those stages of infancy which are susceptible to the effects of an improved knowledge and practice of mothercraft. The infant mortality rate in 1922 was the lowest on record. Furthermore the grant has indirectly served the purpose of maintaining a number of district nursing societies, which would otherwise have succumbed owing to shortage of funds.
The Vote of £10,000 for the present year is not a true measure of current or future requirements, seeing that it represented an arbitrary curtailment of the figure £13,000 recommended twelve months ago. The actual outlay for 1922-23 was just short of that figure, but should be supplemented by an amount of somewhat more than £300, which for accidental causes fell to be paid in the current financial year. In addition, there is "normal growth," due to such causes as increased remuneration of officers for meritorious service, as well as the revival or reappearance of schemes which did not come under review for recoupment during the troubled period. I have recently expressed the view that the liabilities for the current year may be reckoned at a minimum of £13,000. As a means of retrenchment it has been decided to exclude, temporarily, capital outlay from recoupment—this would be likely to affect one scheme, with a possible saving of £500—and to re-transfer to local authorities the primary liability for food schemes of voluntary agencies, undertaken by the grant under Treasury authority as an emergency measure in 1921—contemplated net saving: £500 in a full year. It is not, however, expected that an immediate reduction of grant expenditure would follow, firstly, because we should have to finance the voluntary food schemes up to 31st March, and secondly, because the instalment principle, for which approval has been obtained, will be applied to local authorities in the next financial year. The expenditure to 31st December, 1923, was £4,906 18s. 9d. The greater bulk of the expenditure will arise during March quarter, when the claims of the voluntary agencies for the year 1923 fall to be met. On the whole it is considered essential that a sum of £13,500 should be provided.
Can the Minister indicate to us to what extent those schemes, such as Child Welfare Schemes, are operating in the various parts of the Saorstát? Are they confined to the cities, or are they in existence in the rural areas? The whole sum is not very great, spread over the Twenty-six Counties. It would be interesting to know whether it is Dublin, Limerick and Cork which are getting the benefit of those schemes, or whether anything is being done in the country. I admit the need of the cities is greater, but it would be interesting to have an idea as to the extent to which this very necessary and valuable work—I am not opposing the grant—is prevailing in the various parts of the country.
I understand that provision is made both in the rural and urban districts. I have not got the list here at the present time, but I would be willing to furnish the Deputy with a list of the areas.
Can the Minister say whether the expenditure of £13,000 is mainly employed in the cities of Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Waterford? I think that the Dáil will be satisfied if we can have some general indication as to what the £13,500 is for and where it is to be expended. We are not asking for details, but in general we think the Dáil is entitled to some information as to the scheme and the places where this work is being carried on. We want a little information as to why the Minister requires £13,500.
Would the Minister say who is responsible for carrying out this scheme in the rural areas? I understand where this scheme is carried out in an urban district the urban council is responsible, or a committee is set up by the urban council containing some outside people.
The Wexford Corporation have adopted that scheme. They have appointed a committee to deal with it, but I think we only get £160 from the Ministry, and they are very hard-set to give us that at times.
It seems to me to be obvious that under this important heading either the thing is not a very comprehensive operation or that the sum of £13,500 will certainly not cover it. After all, if there is general application in the Twenty-six Counties, both in the rural and urban districts and in the cities, £13,500 would not go a very long way. I would like to know from the Minister if all those small services that we see here will, under the new Bill, come under a central authority, the Health Authority, or will they still be in those small detached amounts? Child welfare is very popular. It appeals to people as being a very necessary thing to be carried out thoroughly. If it comes under the Public Health official under the new regime I think it ought to be of a much more comprehensive nature than it is at present.
In the rural areas this money is administered mostly by voluntary societies, but the great bulk of the fund, I should say, is administered in the cities. There is a very comprehensive scheme in Limerick, Dublin, Cork and the larger cities. Under our Bill it is intended, as far as possible, to centralise this expenditure under the County Medical Officers, and owing to the fact that it is carried out by different voluntary societies at present, it is very hard at a moment's notice to give detailed information about the scheme. The great bulk of the money is expended in the larger cities.
I must take exception to the Minister's remark that it is at a moment's notice. These estimates have been on the paper for weeks, and it is the duty of a Minister, when he comes down to the Dáil to defend his estimate, to be furnished with facts necessary to support every subject. It is quite unfair, in dealing with the Dáil, to say that this is only at a moment's notice. These are the Minister's estimates, and it is our function to criticise them. We are doing our duty, are putting questions, and we have a right to information. We should not be told that the matter is being raised at short notice.
As far as the point is concerned of the Minister not giving information, I think I can give a little information as to what is done about this matter. The proper way to find out what is actually expended is to multiply it by two. At least £27,000 is expended for this particular function. It would be more than that. That is approximately what would be spent. Under this scheme, local authorities are entitled to give free milk to necessitous children and expectant mothers. There is a highly-trained nurse employed. She is called a Jubilee Nurse, I think, and the Department pays half her salary. That is how the Department's money is spent—on provision of free milk and the payment of half the agreed expenses.
If the Deputies wish to pass the item I will be able to deal with it more fully later on. I think Deputy Cooper took me up wrongly in what I said. I have no objection to criticism in this matter at all; I welcome it. At the same time Deputy Cooper must realise that it is hard for me to anticipate what questions will arise on any particular item, and I would have to come down with a bundle of statistics "that height" to answer any possible questions of that kind in detail.
I think what I have stated is correct.
On Vote 39, sub-head N—Grants under the Education (Provision of Meals) (Ireland) Act— I note an increase of £500 over the Estimate of last year. It is a very small increase, but it would be well that we should know how it is accounted for, and whether it indicates pressure on the part of the Ministry upon local authorities to apply this Act and enforce it in their own areas, and what response has there been applied. that pressure, if it has been applied. I would like if the Minister would oblige us by indicating the terms of the circular which he may have sent to the local authorities on this matter. He will agree about the desirability of enforcing this Act and putting it into operation in the larger towns and cities.
I think we should be told what has been the action of the Minister in the direction of bringing the powers they have under the Act to their notice, and what kind of pressure he has laid upon them to enforce it. If the response has only been an increase of £500, it has not been very satisfactory to the local authorities, and if he will show me that he has brought the requisite pressure to bear on the authorities, and that they have refused to respond, I think then we can direct our criticism to the local authorities. In the meantime I would like to have some indication of the Minister's policy in this matter, and to what extent he has brought his persuasiveness to bear upon the local authorities in regard to the Act.
In this matter, I would like to know from the Minister if it is the policy of his department to object to pupils in the Christian Brothers' Schools taking advantage of this provision of meals for school children. I know that some of his auditors have drawn the attention of some councils in the Saorstát to matters that were considered illegal. The idea was that the poor children in the Christian Brothers' Schools should be prevented from having meals under this Act. I think we have arrived at that stage now that such disabilities should be removed. I would like to hear from the Minister that, in future, there will be no objection to pupils in Christian Brothers' Schools being treated the same as pupils in National Schools. Christian Brothers have done a good deal in this country. There are poor children endeavouring to take advantage of the education afforded them by the Christian Brothers, and the Minister ought not to stand in their way in the matter of having meals provided for them.
Recently the Minister sent out a circular objecting to the procedure of some local authorities in the allocation of this grant. I think most urban areas are limited to striking a rate of 2d. in the £. In Wexford that rate realises £160 and we get £160 from the Minister. The School Attendance Committee there meets monthly, and at a certain period in the year they ask the different schools for a list of the poor children attending. The Wexford School Attendance Committee adopted the procedure of spreading the money over five or six schools in the year, pro rata. The Ministry object to that procedure, and they insist that the School Attendance Committee should administer the money in detail. That is an impossible task.
By itself the School Attendance Committee, with the amount of money provided, would not be able to cope successfully with the number of poor children attending the various schools. All the schools have a certain amount of their own money, and with this they augment the amount obtained from the School Attendance Committee. It would be a most injudicious thing for the Minister to insist on the regulations that he sent out to the local authorities. I would ask the Minister to agree to the arrangements that existed up to the present. The School Attendance Committee get the money, and they superintend the serving of meals periodically, and are satisfied that the thing is done properly. Considering the small amount spent in urban areas, I do not think that the Minister should insist on any rigid regulations.
I do not know whether Deputy Johnson asked for a categorical answer to his question of how much was actually expended last year by the Government in this way. We have not got the appropriation allowances for this year, and the grants, of course, gives us no idea of how much was actually spent. Perhaps the Minister, if he has not given the information already, will give it now?
Practically the whole Estimate has been spent. Deputies Johnson and Corish have asked for rather comprehensive information under this sub-head. With regard to the position of Christian Brothers' Schools, I have no objection to allowing them to come under those provisions, but I have no legal power at present to allow the granting of meals to their pupils. I would have no objection to any amendment to that effect that would be introduced in the Local Government Bill. The urban councils are empowered to make arrangements for the provision of meals for children attending the National Schools if there are any children who, by reason of lack of food, fail to take full advantage of the education provided for them, and when there are no other funds available.
In those circumstances, the council may be authorised to expend from the rates such sum as would meet the cost of such food, the amount not exceeding an expenditure equivalent to the produce of a rate of ½d. in the £ on the district. The amending Act of 1916 doubled this amount, and the limitation was entirely removed by the 1917 Act, which also contained provision for the recoupment to the Council of any sums they expended in providing meals for school children, subject to certain regulations. It will be noted that the limit of expenditure on successive occasions pointed to a rapid increase in the outlay. This upward tendency in the cost appears to have continued. The most expensive scheme is in the Dublin Co. Borough, and the highest point was reached in 1919-20, when £14,560 11s. 10d. was spent. Owing to lack of funds the scheme was curtailed the following year, and only £1,926 19s. 7d. was earned from the grant. The recoupment in 1922-23 rose to £4,461 4s. 6d., and the total expenditure of the latter year was £12,166 10s. 10d. According to the return received in the 33 schools in the Dublin scheme, 6,143 children were authorised to receive meals, at an average daily number of 5,640. In Cork Co. Borough the recoupment rose from £375 to £1,123 for the last financial year.
It will thus be seen that this grant, if it is not rigidly controlled, is likely to reach an excessive amount, and, for that reason, our Department has to be very careful as to the amount of money expended under it. I am not aware that any circular issued from our Department has resulted in hardship in this particular line. If Deputy Corish has any recommendations to make on the head of that circular, I would be willing to give them every consideration.
The information that the Minister has given with regard to the history of this Act and the experience of past years is very valuable and useful in many ways. But we are dealing with the Estimate for this current year, and I was anxious to know what was the policy of the Ministry in regard to the utilisation of this Act by the local authorities. In the last phrase or two the Minister suggests that it is necessary for the Department to be somewhat rigid in its sanction or in its approval of schemes. Does that mean that the Department is not to encourage the local authorities to put this Act into operation, or does it mean that it is to discourage the local authority from putting this Act into operation? The amounts mentioned undoubtedly are very small, and it is perhaps true to say that the local authorities, or some of them, would be quite willing to vote sums of money for the purpose of feeding school children. But others of them would probably require some prompting and would require some advice as to the necessitous.
We have had information of circulars having been issued from the Department regarding the rates of pay that should be fixed by local authorities, all in the direction of cutting down the rates of pay. In a general way, that implies a lowering of standards, and, incidentally, has the effect, as I would argue on a fitting occasion, of extending the area of unemployment. But the Minister realises himself, as he has expressed several times, that there is a great amount of distress. There is a great amount of poverty, and here in this country, and in this city, as in every other place where poverty is general, the children suffer, very often unknown to themselves. Weakness develops, and they do not realise it. There is no apparent suffering, but there is actual deterioration of physical stamina. Under this Act local authorities have power to levy rates and make provision by the collection of funds from private sources. I should take it that the Minister will have no alternative but to provide for the half expenditure on sanctioned schemes. What I desire to know is: What has been the policy of the Ministry in regard to this Act? Have they, in fact, encouraged the local authorities to meet the needs of the children by providing school meals? Inasmuch as only £5,500 has been budgeted for, this year, can he say where the fault lies? How many of the local authorities have been recalcitrant in this respect? How many of them have refused to follow his advice or can he say how many local authorities have taken advantage of the Act, and made provision for the feeding of school children?
I believe, of course, that this whole scheme should be developed to a very great extent and that it should not be confined to the provision of a very meagre or plain meal, bread and cocoa, bread and jam and cocoa or bread and jam and milk, as it too often is. I would like to see this whole scheme developed so as to be part of the educational system, where children in the National Schools would be dealt with in regard to their dinner or their meal just as they would be in a boarding school and learn to delight in the common meal. But I suppose we are a little bit distant from that, and we have to be satisfied with what is available at the moment. But are we making the best use of the powers that exist? Is the Ministry doing its best to encourage local authorities to make provision for children attending school so that they shall not be a burden upon their teachers for one thing, and that they will be able to take advantage of the education that is provided for them, and that the education vote, that we will be dealing with at a later stage, will be more economically spent because the children will be in a better position to take advantage of the lessons that are put before them? This is not a simple matter, not a matter that should be passed over carelessly or with a few words explaining what was intended. It is a matter going to the roots of the policy of the Ministry and quite apart from and different from other measures which are compulsory and which we will deal with later. Here we have a voluntary Act, that is to say, an Act under which the local authorities have the option of putting the scheme into force, but when they do so, then the Central Authority, the State, comes to the financial assistance of these local authorities.
I want to know whether the Ministry have, for this positive, constructive work of upbuilding the children and keeping them in physical fitness, adopted a policy of suggestion and urging in these cases as they have done in other Departments of their responsible work, or are we to blame the local authorities wholly? Have the Ministry, as a matter of fact, brought the suggestions to the local authorities with regard to the utilisation of their powers under this Act? Will the Minister produce for us or tell us what has been the line of his advice? Will he give us the terms of his Circular Letters? I have not had supplied to me, and I have made some inquiry, but those from whom I have inquired are not able to say whether any urgings of this kind have come from the Ministry. It seems to me that if the Ministry have not taken positive steps to bring before the local authorities the desirability of using their powers in this matter, then the Ministry has failed in its duty. I would like the Minister to tell us fully what his Department has done in this matter, and I would like further, if he would tell us what local authorities have made use of their powers under this Act in the last year, and does he propose to bring to their notice early the necessity for making provision and making preparation for a fuller expenditure under the Act in the coming winter months? Because, unfortunately, it is in the winter months that the greater need is for the provision of meals for school-children.
I said a few days ago that Ireland had been cursed with permissive Acts of Parliament. This is one of them. We want to get public opinion with us in this matter, and it will take some time to bring it up to the point Deputy Johnson has in mind. I have been advocating for a considerable time the necessity for some food to be given to children in the National Schools. As Deputy Johnson has pointed out, the children cannot take the value out of the educational facilities afforded them if they are hungry or under-fed. In particular, I pity the children in the rural schools—children who get probably a breakfast at seven or eight o'clock in the morning. They get a little to take with them, but sometimes this is eaten before they get to school, and these children are kept in school for six hours, after which they have to walk two or three miles home again. In the case of the rural schools there should be some provision made. I would not care whether it was done by voluntary association or otherwise. I would rather see it done by the local sanitary authority which, if the Bill now before the Dáil passes, will be the Board of Health.
At all events, as I say, we must get the public educated up to the point to say that the children must be fed in the middle of the day. In the schools of the city there are two classes attending. They are children who could go home and get something to eat, and children who could go home and get nothing. But you cannot differentiate between these two, and in my opinion there must be a simple meal provided. I do not care about cocoa; I would prefer that the children get a half-pint of milk with a slice of bread and butter. That may be resented, by some of the teachers. Some of the teachers do not want the bother of getting the meal for the children. But we should endeavour to teach the teachers that that would necessarily be part of their duty, and I do not think that in the long run it would be very expensive, number 1, or very difficult to carry out, number 2, if even this simple meal I suggest were given to them. But I do say that this is a great necessity, and I repeat that as far as Deputy Johnson and his followers are concerned, I think they should, on all occasions when they speak in public, refer to this as a necessary matter. One can see from the amount that is spent here, how few of the District Councils have taken advantage of the adoption of this scheme that, I have no doubt, was put up to them by the Government. I may say in passing that the discussion this afternoon has shown that we are sadly wanting in not having a Minister of Health, or as I suggested on the Estimates before, at least a Parliamentary Secretary, because it is absolutely impossible for the Minister for Local Government, who has no knowledge of these matters, and who only quite recently has come to his present position, to give the information at a moment's notice. It would be impossible for any Minister for Local Government to carry all this information and to give it to us at once when requested.
I should like to know, before the Minister replies, what proportion of the local authorities has taken advantage of this Act and is there, a tendency in the urban areas towards an increase or decrease, as here set out in this item of expenditure? So far, I entirely agree with what Deputy Sir James Craig has said. The question of cocoa and bread certainly means nothing. I can speak for Wexford, where we insist that the children should be provided with soup and milk on different occasions.
It is the policy of my Department to give every encouragement to this scheme, and the Department has circularised the local authorities to this effect, and sent out our inspectors with instructions to give the local authorities very full information as to how this scheme should be carried out. We are in the fullest sympathy with the idea of extending and developing this scheme. Deputy Sir James Craig has referred to the fact that it is a permissive Act. In some respects, probably that is a good thing, but until we have the whole local government administration properly centralised in an Act, when I believe this would come in under the control of the County Medical Officer, we have very little facilities for having our views on matters of this kind put into operation. I have no reason to wish to interfere unduly with the undoubted discretion of the local authorities in such matters. As I say, we have done everything to explain the benefits which will be conferred upon the growing population, and it is a necessity in very many cases to the local authority, and we can do very little more.
Different councils provide different meals. In some cases, as Deputy Corish has mentioned, soups and stews which are a very substantial kind of food, are provided. In other cases bread and butter, or bread and jam and milk and cocoa, are provided. Deputy Sir J. Craig has referred to the rural districts. I do not think that the necessity is by any means as great in rural districts as in towns for provision of this kind. As a general rule country children are very much better provided with healthy food, and in my own experience, I saw very few children going to school in the country districts who did not carry their lunch under their arms. With regard to the local authorities who have taken up this scheme, I think they only number 24; they are:—Athlone U.D.C., Athy, Bray, Carlow and Cavan——
Will the Minister give the figures of the amount they expend or of the amounts to which they are entitled?
I do not think I have these details by me.
Because some of these local authorities applied the Act years ago, but have not continued to carry it through, and I would like to know whether these 24 authorities include those who may have dropped it since.
The authorities I am giving are those actually operating, but I could not give the figures at the moment:—Cork County Borough, Dublin County Borough, Dungarvan U.D.C., Enniscorthy U.D.C., Fermoy U.D.C., Kells U.D.C., Kilkenny U.D.C., Killarney U.D.C., Dun Laoghaire U.D.C., Listowel U.D.C., Navan U.D.C., New Ross U.D.C., Templemore U.D.C., Tullamore U.D.C., Waterford County Borough, Waterford City, Wexford Youghal, Mallow and Sligo U.D.C's.
We now come to sub-head (O), and there we have a very different classification from that with which we have been dealing. There we come to something that is mandatory upon the county councils. I would find it very hard here to reserve any nice things to say of the Government if matters had not been so difficult for them. Until a county medical officer of health is appointed who would be able to take charge of this and look after it properly, I kept very quite. At the same time, I think that the Government should have made an effort, as far as possible, to get this scheme, which they drafted, and which I presume they sent round to the county councils, adopted. At the same time I say their difficulty was that there might have been an officer appointed who would have been placed in a position that he might not have been able to retain when the Local Government Bill which has been introduced came into force. For that reason, I am very easy upon them. But we want to make quite sure that there will be no mistake about the inclusion of this provision in the scheme adopted in connection with the new Bill. As was pointed out by Deputy O'Connell and myself, when there was no reference whatever in the Local Government Bill in regard to this matter, the Act at present in force is mandatory, and the county councils must adopt it if the Government insisted upon it. But, as I say, we are not going to criticise too severely, because we want to see the county medical officer of health appointed. He will be, as it were, the head of all these services. All these services will be co-ordinated under the county medical officer of health. The small sum of money put down here for inspection of schools and treatment of school children is simply absurd, and there is very little use asking the Minister what county councils adopted it when the whole sum only amounts to £1,660.
I, too, want to draw attention to the fact that this is not a voluntary optional scheme. It is one which is mandatory, and imposes upon County Borough Councils the duty of providing medical treatment for school children. The Act further provides that if local authorities fail in their duty, then it is for the Minister to enforce the Act by appointing persons to do the work and to pay them. The duty is then upon the Minister to see that the Act is enforced. If it is not enforced by the county authority, he is obliged to do it. I would like to know in how many cases that has been done. I would like to know from the Minister in how many towns or counties, or county boroughs, the Act has been enforced. On the last Vote the Minister pleaded the necessity for centralisation and for a compulsory law in the matter of the provision of meals. Here we have a compulsory Act providing for the medical treatment and inspection of children, and what, I ask, has he done in connection with that? What is the policy of the Ministry in respect to this Act? Has he enforced the law? Let me say that it is not enough to point to the defects of the county councils if there have been defects. Here we have, as I say, a mandatory Act. Will the Minister tell us what the Commissioner, who has been responsible for the administration in Kerry, has done? Has he provided for the medical inspection of school children? Is the law carried out in Kerry in respect to this? Is the Commissioner, who is administering the affairs in Leitrim County at present, carrying out the law in respect to this? If not, what has the Minister done to bring his duty to his notice? There are £1,600 paid for this work. I ask, will the Minister bring immediately to the notice of the Commissioners for the County Borough of Dublin that they must provide medical inspection and treatment of school children, that it is the law? The provision of £1,600, as Deputy Sir James Craig has mentioned, rather suggests that not a great deal has been done. The Act was passed in 1919, and one can explain quite easily why it was not given effect to during the two or three years following its passing. But the year 1923 was one in which the Act could have been enforced, and this is a year in which the Act could be enforced. Will the Minister tell us what is his policy in regard to this Act? Has he insisted upon any of the county councils, or to bring the matter close home to him, upon any of the Commissioners that have been appointed by him to do the work of the county councils—has he insisted upon these persons fulfilling the law in respect of the medical treatment and inspection of school children?
There was an English Act, and I assume it was drafted more with reference to the conditions in England than the conditions over here. A county in England is a much more important unit than a county in Ireland. The appointment of a medical inspector of schools would, I imagine, be an economic proposition for a big populous area like an English county, but it might be altogether uneconomic for an area of the size of the average Irish county. In addition to that, at the present time we have no machinery for putting this Act into operation. It is true, of course, that the Act is mandatory, but, even though it is mandatory, you would want to have some machinery for giving it effect. I am in full agreement with the idea of putting this measure into operation. It is intended under the new Bill to put it in force. At the present time we are encouraging the idea in county boroughs where we have a medical superintendent officer of health to have it enforced. If we were to enforce it in the various counties at the present time it would mean duplicating the work, and it would mean having to pension these officers when the county medical officer was appointed. When the county medical officer is appointed in the various counties he will be able to perform several of these services, including the medical inspection of school children, tuberculosis officer, and other services, or, at least, he will be able to control those who are administering them.
For these reasons I have not attempted to enforce the Act at the present time, not even in counties where Commissioners have been appointed, such as in Kerry and Leitrim. I may say that I have issued instructions to the Commissioners of the Dublin Corporation to put the Act in force forthwith. Dublin is a place where we have the machinery for enforcing it. Deputy Johnson cannot have it both ways. He cannot hold up the Local Government Bill, which would give me the machinery to enforce this measure, and at the same time condemn me for not putting the Act in force.
I just wish to correct one statement made by the Minister. The Act dealing with the medical inspection and treatment of school children, although passed in the British Parliament, was an Act referring to Ireland. The Act is entitled "An Act to make provision for the Medical Inspection of Children attending Elementary Schools in Ireland, etc."
Is it not true that the Irish Act was based on the English Act?
The English Act was of old standing.
The Minister has not told us whether the £1,600 was expended. Perhaps he will do that, because it will help us to understand the position better. I may tell the Minister at once that if he will bring in the Local Government Bill to-morrow, shorn of its evils, and making provision for public health services, I will give him every support. But, I am not going to be enticed to take poison under the cover of jam. I am not quite able to understand the attitude of the Minister on this matter. It is well that the Minister for Justice is not present. The Minister here says that until a new law is passed that we are not going to enforce the old one; that until something is enacted which may be enacted or may be refused, we are going to let the present law lie in abeyance. That is a rather strange doctrine to come from the Ministerial benches.
I think that the question of medical treatment, or more particularly medical inspection, of school children is probably more important than, certainly of equal importance to, the feeding of school children, with which we have just dealt. This sum of £1,600 refers, I presume, to two or three districts—I do not know how many. We have no information as to whether the Act is in force. Possibly, it is partially in force here and there, but if the Ministry is going to rely on the future enforcement of this Act, or any such Act, upon the activities of the medical officer, of the county officer of health, who is to be appointed, and if he is the person who inspects the children in the schools, as well as doing the other work, then it is going to be an enormous task. It is quite impossible, and the work will not be done. There is no need to wait, and I submit that it would not be a difficult task to consult with Deputy Sir James Craig and find out how the Act could be brought into operation next week. I do not know what the Minister is boggling at when he speaks about the necessity for machinery. Surely, there is not a great deal of machinery required to enforce an Act of this kind, and if we want to curtail the charges on the State, and upon the local authorities, in the matter of sickness, disease, and death in future years, we are going to expend the money in the most economical way possible, by spending it in the inspection of school children. You would save very many thousands and hundreds of thousands of pounds, in ten, fifteen or twenty years' time, by spending a few hundreds of pounds in the care of children, in advising them when they need treatment. I would like the Minister to take this matter up very seriously, and not to wait until a new Act comes into operation before he endeavours to put into force the law that at present exists, and should be operative. I would like him to tell us before we pass from this where, as a matter of fact, this £1,600 is likely to be spent, and in what districts, or parts of the country the Act is in operation.
Deputy Johnson has informed us that if I brought in my Bill shorn of its evils, he would be quite willing to support it. I am afraid if I bring in a Bill shorn of all the evils from the point of view of all the Deputies, there would be very little indeed of a Bill to bring in, because every Deputy would see the evils from a different point of view. At present we are only attempting to apply the Act to the county boroughs, and the county of Cork is the first place where that scheme has been accepted. We also, as I say, intend to put it into force in Dublin. As well as that, there are various other voluntary agencies at work in different parts of the Saorstát, whose labours we are supplementing at the present time. The present position with regard to the Estimate is of a highly speculative character, owing to the different contingencies—I mean when we were making this Estimate we did not know but our Bill would be through, and it was very hard to fix any specific sum. Assuming that the two last-mentioned projects, that is the Dublin and the Cork schemes, should mature, a grant contribution of, say, £2,000 may be reckoned on. In the case of one definite scheme, Cork, the initial expenditure may be taken at £80 a month, but after the preliminary surveying covering six months, the expenditure will approximate to the full estimated figure of £3,000 per annum. A grant requirement of £835 seems possible for 1924-25. Another small scheme is under consideration, but the charge on the grant would be only about £50. In considering the case of the small voluntary schemes which have been assisted from the grant pending the introduction of the Bill and arrangements we shall make under it, particulars of twelve such schemes are on record, but it would seem that only eight are still operative within the local limits in which they work, and these seem to be performing a useful service in attending to the dental defects of school children. The cost of such might be put at £125 a year. To meet all purposes an estimate of £2,000 is recommended.
May I ask if a scheme is actually in force in Cork?
The scheme at the moment is not actually in force. There is a difficulty between my Department and the county borough over the appointment of an officer who is not qualified according to our rules, and the local body was very stubborn about agreeing to the appointment of an officer who had all the qualifications we required for this purpose.
I want to call the attention of the Minister on this sub-head (P) to the welfare of the blind. I want to recall to him the pledge that was given by the Minister for Finance when we were discussing the Old Age Pensions Bill. I think several Deputies felt great reluctance about reducing the pensions for the blind—far more reluctance in that matter than in dealing with the pensions for the aged for old age is a calamity that comes to all except the more fortunate; but the blind are stricken by the hand of God. We were able to persuade the Minister for Finance to give us an undertaking that if a suitable scheme were put up to him by the responsible Minister he would devote the savings he made on the pensions of the blind to the welfare of the blind.
Now, that was, I think, almost a remarkable occurrence. The Minister for Finance usually says, like Richard III. in Shakespeare's play: "I am not in a giving mood to-day." But, for once in a way, the Minister for Finance was found in a giving mood. But the Minister for Local Government has not taken advantage of that giving mood; and so far from presenting us with an increased Estimate for the welfare of the blind on a scheme to which these savings that are made in the pensions of the blind could be applied, the Minister is presenting us with a reduced Estimate, an Estimate reduced by only £60 short of £1,000. Now, I humbly suggest that there is no justification for that action. Once the Minister for Finance had given that undertaking, it was the duty of the Minister for Local Government, as the responsible guardian of the blind, to take advantage of that undertaking and to put to the Minister for Finance and to the Dáil a scheme for using those savings to benefit those unfortunate persons who have lost their sight. I am not suggesting that he should enlarge the bounds to include people who are merely short-sighted, who merely have a defect in seeing. I am speaking solely of those people who are so blind that they cannot provide for themselves or look out for themselves. And I say with regret that, as their trustee, the Minister has failed in his duty. I know he has. I hope he will not think that I am criticising him too harshly. He has an immense and a complicated Department, and I hope my criticism previously was not unduly severe. He has got an enormous Department with very many details to look after, and in his zeal to eliminate the unfit, in the shape of local governing bodies, he has possibly not been able to go into all these details with sufficiently meticulous care, and to put them before the Dáil. I would suggest that in another year he would give us a White Paper, before the Estimates are discussed, giving us the details of where schemes have been put in force and the amount of money spent. That would help the Dáil. He is not an Executive Minister; he is responsible only to the Dáil; and this is the one opportunity that the Dáil has of canvassing his doings. If we let this thing pass, if we wait for him to give us the information that he has to give, and that I know he will give us, the time will have gone by and we will have to wait until next year; and by that time the matter will be out of date. Nobody liked to vote for the Old Age Pensions Bill, but the thing I disliked, above all other matters in it, was the cut in the pensions of the blind, and I reconciled myself to it solely and entirely because of the pledge given by the Minister for Finance. Now, I find that the Minister for Local Government and Public Health has not availed himself of that pledge; he has neglected to put forward any scheme involving increased expenditure on behalf of the blind; he actually proposes to reduce expenditure on the blind; and I have only one course to follow, and that is, as a protest, to move the reduction of this Vote by £1 in order that we should have a division on this matter.
I must come to the aid of the Minister, and I notice that he sits down when that happens.
Something gone wrong in the works.
It is my sense of justice. Realising how accurate and true my position has been up to now, I feel that my position must continue to be accurate and true. In respect of this matter, I suggest to the Deputy that the Minister had prepared this Estimate before the promise of the Minister for Finance had been made. And we have a right to assume—I am quite sure of it—that the Minister will be coming along in a little while and saying that he has persuaded the Minister for Finance to keep his promise, and that there will be a Supplementary Estimate adding the sum that is to be purloined from the blind pensioners, and that the Minister will urge that it should be used for some other purpose under the Blind Persons Act. And I suggest to the Deputy who wants to move the reduction that he had better wait and allow the Minister an opportunity of bringing in this Supplementary Estimate, because it is quite apparent that the promise made followed the preparation of the Estimate.
But then, again, I want to know why the Ministry has not carried out the law, why the Ministry has not urged upon the local authorities, who are bound by the Blind Persons Act, to put the law into operation. There is a reduction—as the Deputy has pointed out—in this Estimate of £940, as compared with the Estimate of a year ago. It is mandatory upon the local authorities to make provision for the welfare of the blind in their districts, and to provide opportunities for employment suitable for blind persons. That has been done to a very little extent indeed. As a matter of fact, so far as one can learn, most of this money that is to be voted will be transferred from the local authorities to certain institutions where, no doubt, good work is done, but not the work that was called for under the Blind Persons Act. Now, if the Minister can show us that he has brought the requisite pressure to bear on the local authorities to fulfil their duties in this respect, as he has done in respect of other matters, I will acquite him of the amount of negligence that I now fear he is guilty of. I think that it is his duty to prove to us that he has told the local authorities that they are bound to do these things, and to put into operation this Blind Persons Act. It is his duty to prove to us that he has taken steps to find out whether the local authorities have failed to do this, and to find out what preparations they are making to put the Act into operation. Quite apart from the promise of the Minister for Finance, how does the Minister for Local Government justify a reduction in this Vote by £940? Is it that the local authorities are not doing as well this year as they did last year? Is it that his instructions regarding the fulfilment of the law have been disobeyed? Then, will he tell us which of them has disobeyed in this matter, and what is he going to do? The instructions that have been given regarding these people seem to imply that when we are dealing with matters affecting the diseased, and the sick, and the young, the Ministry is not insisting that the provisions which the law required shall be made operative, and that it is only when we come to questions of rates of pay, what is called economy, that the Ministry is rigid and insistent. Now, as I said on the last Vote, there is greater economy in enforcing these Acts than in saving a few pounds, or a few thousands of pounds, or a few tens of thousands of pounds on reductions in rates of wages. You are investing money with the certainty of a very big return in a very few years; and it is a pity to see a reduction in the Vote under this welfare of the blind scheme, such as is now presented to us.
I find myself in an awkward position with Deputy Johnson coming to my rescue in such a gallant way. I am afraid that in coming so far to my point of view he has gone a little outside his own orbit, because I find him advocating bureaucracy in this matter of asking me to interfere with local authorities in administering this fund. All the arguments the Deputies are addressing here are arguments in favour of my Bill that has been laid on the shelf. Deputy Cooper has complained of the fact that I am not sufficiently in touch with all those activities of my Department. But in its present chaotic condition it is absolutely impossible to get in touch with every detail of administration. We have got none of these health services centralised. They are all divided up between local authorities and voluntary societies and agencies. It is really a very difficult task to keep in touch with them all.
Deputy Johnson is quite correct in saying that this estimate was made before the Minister for Finance gave his undertaking. The Estimate was made in December. I am quite willing to put up a scheme as promised by the Minister for Finance, and I am certainly desirous of doing what I can to help or improve the position of these unfortunate blind people. As in so many other cases, the provision of relief in this case rests with the local authority. The scheme which county and county borough councils are required by Section 2 of the Blind Persons Act of 1920 to formulate with a view to promoting the welfare of the blind in their areas, has not yet been adopted in any district, although a circular letter urging the desirability of taking action under that section, was sent to all such Councils on the 22nd March, 1922, and our inspectors have brought this matter under the attention of those Councils on several occasions. Our grant in this particular case is based on the estimates of local authorities, and our recoupment, according to their estimate, falls short by £940, compared with the estimate for last year. That is the explanation of the reduction of the estimate. It is really a matter over which I have no control, except in so far as I can persuade or use persuasive powers with the local authority. I do not believe that Deputy Johnson would suggest that I should put in Commissioners because they have refused to accede to my entreaties in this matter.
I suggest to the Minister that if he is going to let the law lie aside in a case of this kind, under the cover that to enforce it would be bureaucracy, he had better let it lie aside in other matters under the same cover.
I have always been brought up to believe that the most wonderful sight in the world was Satan rebuking sin. We now have his parallel, Deputy Johnson, defending the Minister for Local Government and Public Health. I cannot remain unmoved by such a sublime spectacle and, therefore, having regard to the undertaking given by the Minister, that he is preparing a scheme for the welfare of the blind and is going to force it home on the Minister for Finance, I will withdraw my amendment.
As to sub-head Q, I have really no experience of the tuberculosis schemes throughout the country, but I am told by those who do know, that these schemes have been practically failures. Therefore, I am not encouraged to support the increase from £35,000 to £38,000 in this Estimate. I am told by those who know that these schemes are comparative failures because of want of knowledge, lack of experience, and want of enthusiasm in administering the schemes. No one will be better pleased than I shall be if this is denied. It has been impressed upon me by very many people, but if the Deputies here, who have knowledge of them, state that these schemes are really producing good effects, no one will be better pleased to hear it than I shall.
I would think that an opportunity is not likely to recur, and that the Minister should take this opportunity of making a very full statement as to exactly what these schemes are, and how the administration of them stands. No one will know better than you, sir, exactly what a scourge this matter is in certain parts of the country, especially in the extreme West. I have had some knowledge of it myself. In the West tuberculosis is such a scourge largely owing to mal-nutrition, and the fact that houses, infected for generations with this disease, go on being inhabited. I know houses in Achill with which I am acquainted and with the people of which I am acquainted, where it is an ordinary thing to see young girls and boys being taken out of these houses regularly with tuberculosis, and when they are once infected with the disease, it is only a matter of weeks or months with them. Then, if there be anybody in the locality interested to try and help these particular cases, it is the greatest difficulty in the world to try and get in touch with some part of some definite scheme that can come to the assistance of such persons as these.
I speak from long experience of lads and girls whom one has met here and there in Achill. In the last resort one has had to apply to Dublin to friends of one's own for private charity to meet cases of this kind. There are schemes, but nobody knows what these schemes are and exactly how the machinery may be set in motion. Unless there be somebody on the spot who can busy himself or herself in the interests of those poor people, what generally happens is that robust men become affected and in less than twelve months are taken off to the graveyard. The people there have not actual knowledge of the scourge, and, even when they see the thing happen they do not know what the scheme is, what the machinery is, and how assistance can be brought to them. Even where people interest themselves in cases of the kind, it is difficult to find out how these schemes can be worked round to the benefit of the people affected.
I think it will be admitted that, particularly in the West—I have no experience elsewhere in this matter— there ought to be a campaign of education. It should be, not merely a scheme, as I believe most of these schemes are, to help persons once they are affected by tuberculosis, but a general campaign, so that people might know exactly what a scourge it is and take preventative measures, especially as regards children being brought up in houses saturated with this infection. I urge the Minister to take this opportunity of making a statement to the Dáil, very clearly and very fully, with regard to a disease which is laying waste so much of our national life. Beginning with such a statement, the Minister should undertake a campaign throughout the country where his statistics inform him the disease is a graver evil than in other parts. Having done that, he should bring to the knowledge of the people what exactly is meant by this scourge, and how best it can be prevented. Where infection has occurred, the public should be told exactly how they may bring the available machinery to the benefit of those who are infected. I can say that that knowledge is not now present to the people. They do not realise what the scourge is, nor do they realise what infection means. When persons are affected they do not know exactly how to get such help as might in the early stages effect a cure.
I would like to support Deputy Figgis in what he has said regarding tuberculosis. I would also like to hear from the Minister a statement as to the measures that are being taken in the country to call special attention to it. I agree with Deputy Figgis that it is by means of propaganda more than anything else the disease will be conquered. I understand tuberculosis is largely a disease arising from mal-nutrition and poverty. It can be prevented very largely by the use of proper food and by fresh air. Medical science, I believe, has made wonderful strides in the treatment of this disease, and it is generally recognised that if children can be kept healthy, they are pretty safe from the danger of contracting the disease after they reach a mature age. That, I think, is not generally known. I trust I am not trespassing in medical matters in dealing with this disease, but I happen to know something about it. Before we can have people healthy, the first consideration, I believe, is the need for proper housing. If people have to live in miserable homes and dirty slums, we will have tuberculosis. The Minister cannot change that state of affairs at a moment's notice, but, he can, certainly, help by propaganda, and by getting people to recognise that almost the very poorest can take measures that will have an effect in preventing the spread of the disease. I am afraid a great deal of misconception exists with regard to tuberculosis throughout the country, and that people are afraid of those who have the reputation of having it. As a result, the disease is largely concealed. I understand there is comparatively little danger of infection, except in youth, and that with fresh air, and good food, the disease can be largely prevented. I might say that the school houses, in my opinion, are very largely to blame in the country districts. They are very often insanitary, small, and badly ventilated. The children are crowded into these schools, and the heating is very often inadequate, the result being that such buildings are potent factors in spreading the disease. I do not know a great deal about the county schemes, but, I think, they are not as effective as they might be. Probably that is due to lack of finances. The Minister may think it strange that I should urge him to spend money, but no matter how keen we may be on economy, this is a matter of urgent national importance, in which we should forget, for once, the possibility of economising. I believe there are very elaborate schemes in England where they have tuberculosis hospitals and special medical men who attend and supply the patients with medicines for use in combating this disease. The finances of this country would hardly stand that expense, but I think a good deal of tightening up might be done, and that the new county medical officers of health who are to be appointed, might be made responsible for seeing that these schemes were more effective. Some special attempt should be made to have this disease, which has been so fatal to our race, and to which we are supposed to be particularly liable, stamped out.
I fear that Deputy Figgis is rather prone to exaggeration in this as in other matters. I think I ought to know the West and Achill. There are fine, intelligent, strong boys and girls in Achill, and their fathers are strong and intelligent. As far as I know, tuberculosis is not very prevalent on the island. If there are cases of tuberculosis there, the people know very well that they can be treated in the infirmary. Not very long ago a very distinguished lady travelled through this country and tried to demonstrate to the world that Ireland was reeking with tuberculosis. It is rather belated now for any Deputy to come along and tell us that one particular place in the country, that I and other Deputies have the honour to represent, is reeking with tuberculosis. It is not. Furthermore, through the agency of the late Congested Districts Board, nearly all the houses on the island have been or are being rebuilt, and as for the lack of fresh air which Deputy Figgis regrets is not to be found as cheaply and as freely as he would wish, I can promise him that if he will come to Achill he will get plenty of it.
I do not want it to be taken for granted, because I rise to speak on the tuberculosis question, that Clare is reeking with consumption. It is not, but I think there is sufficient tuberculosis in the whole country for every Deputy to give his help in endeavouring to stem the tide of what is to some extent eating into the vitals of the nation. I do not want to travel the ground that has already been travelled, and very ably travelled, by the different Deputies who have spoken, but it is quite true and, I think, obvious that this matter is important. It is more or less a problem of housing, the feeding of necessitous school-children, the medical examination of school-children, and the thousand and one other things that do not seem to have any direct touch with it when you examine it purely as a problem of disease. It is quite true also that there should be an educative campaign, a campaign which will teach the people what exactly they should do to avoid more than to cure the disease, because I think that is what we should aim at.
When it gets its grip it does not seem to be curable; at least, as far as we laymen know, it has very rarely been cured, and what we should aim at is to prevent it. There is one point that has not been touched on so far, and that is the new scheme by which the National Health Insurance and the benefits that it will give will come under the control of the Minister for Local Government. I should like to know if he has any scheme in his mind by which there could be co-ordination —that is to say, that there could be a supplementary scheme under his Department, together with the benefits supplied by the National Health Insurance and the other schemes that are connected with it. It is a matter that we have to consider, and also it is worth considering whether there should not be an enforcement of notification of the disease, so that it would not spread so rapidly as it seems to do. I would suggest very sincerely the consideration of a scheme which would provide for those people who are suffering from tuberculosis and who are drawing benefit under the National Health Insurance—that there should be some special benefit and some means by which they would get special treatment, and I would submit that for the consideration of the Minister.
I think it would not be at all fair if any reflections were cast upon the committees who have been working the Acts in connection with the prevention of tuberculosis. From my knowledge I can state that some of the committees with which I am acquainted have met regularly and have considered the reports from the medical officers appointed to deal with cases of tuberculosis, and have afforded domiciliary treatment and nourishment where requisite. They have also sent affected cases for treatment to sanatoriums. I think these committees have done their duty in that way.
I have been associated with two societies in the great county of Cork, the largest county in Ireland, and the best. These societies have for their object the treatment and the management, one of them of the insured persons and the other of the sanatorium at Heatherside. After the great war, nearly every soldier who came home was affected with consumption, from colds contracted at the front, and from other causes. They got domiciliary and other treatment between the British Government and the County Insurance Committee, and they were sent to different sanatoria and have had treatment at home. We were the first in Ireland to build a sanatorium, before any other county.
A DEPUTY
Did you want it more?
We might have wanted it more. I think the time is now opportune for me to make a retrospective claim on the Local Government Department, as £13,500 is still due on that sanatorium. When it was built it was a national sanatorium; it provided relief for every county in Ireland; we refused nobody. I think some of the officials of the Local Government Department will be able to testify as to that. We were promised, I think a year ago, if we made a scheme for the public notification of disease, that this £13,500 would be recouped to us, and I will ask the Minister for Local Government in good faith to try to give us back that £13,500, and we will make the scheme.
A DEPUTY
Another sanatorium.
Not a sanatorium. The sanatorium that I would like to see is the sanatorium that Deputy Hogan has pointed out, that is to prevent the disease by building plenty of labourers' cottages, and if you had enough of them in time, you would not want any sanatoria, with all their expenses. I think I would not be doing my duty to that big county of Cork if I did not ask the Minister for Local Government now, as the Estimates are before us, to remember that he owes us £13,500, and that if he wants absolution from that great county he had better pay up. The bargain is that we make a scheme. If we get the £13,500 we will make the scheme.
There is another matter that I would like to bring under the notice of the Minister. Throughout the country there are a number of old schoolhouses, obsolete old buildings, and into these cold structures will march tender little children of seven, eight, ten or twelve years, perhaps two or three miles in the morning. They may be wet, and they have to stand all day looking at one another, shivering in the cold, or shivering before the schoolmaster. I think that if there was anything to give them consumption these old schools would, more quickly than the trenches gave it to the soldiers. I am really in earnest when I ask the Minister for Local Government to institute an inquiry and send Health Inspectors around. That was one of the reasons that I supported the proposal to appoint Health Inspectors. The sooner you appoint them the better, even better than the abolition of the rural district councils, which you will never abolish. You cannot go against the will of the people.
Can they not? Do not make a mistake about it.
I bet they will not. At any rate my experience of the Minister for Local Government and his staff is that they are good fellows. That will tell you that the tax is not on soft soap yet. I would ask him in all sincerity to look after these old schoolhouses. I believe they are the primary causes of disease. As I pointed out a moment ago, a little boy or a little girl will go two or three miles to these schools and will be, perhaps, without a drink of water all day, without any comforts that a child would have at home, and he cannot go to the schoolmaster as he would to his mother at home. All these little incidents pile up, and the unfortunate lungs are affected. The old schoolhouse was next door to me, and I never caught a cold there.
I quite agree with the Deputies who said that a great deal more could be done by way of lecturing and that kind of thing with a view to preventing the spread of tuberculosis, but there is one thing I think sufficient attention is not being paid to, and that is the question of proper sanitation. The sanitary laws as they apply in urban areas are not sufficiently rigid, and do not give sufficient power to local authorities to remove nuisances which are a distinct menace to public health. I do hope that if that Commission of Inquiry is set up to go into this whole question of Local Government, due attention will be paid to the lack of proper sanitary laws. As I pointed out last week, the machinery is too cumbersome. For instance, in some towns what is a very bad menace to public health cannot be abated for weeks because of the fact that local authorities have not the power to deal with them. Under a certain Public Health Act, if a sewer is stopped in a person's yard, or if there is a lack of proper sanitary conveniences after an order is served, if the nuisance is not abated, the only power the local authority has is to come in, and do that work itself. It has to apply to a court in order to recover what it costs to do it. That requires in most cases a couple of months. Very serious injury may have been done, and the particular nuisance may have been a very serious menace to the public health, not alone of the inhabitants of that particular house, but of the whole area. I think this whole matter ought to be gone into carefully in all its details, and should occupy the attention of the Commission that is about to be set up to consider this Local Government Bill.
Before I finish, because it is the last item so far as I can see that deals with public health matters—I do not see anything about infectious or contagious diseases, and tuberculosis is an infectious disease—I would like to know if the Minister and his Department have taken any action in connection with the matter of the present disease of sleeping sickness. This is becoming very prevalent in Ireland. In view of the seriousness of it, and the number of deaths that have taken place in Belfast—a few in the Saorstát—and the numerous deaths in England, I would like to know if the Minister and his Public Health Department are taking any steps with a view to drawing the attention of the different local boards to the necessity of counteracting the disease, and if any instructions have been issued. I would like to know if his medical advisers are doing anything to counteract this disease. It does seem to be a serious matter, and I think the Minister and his Department ought to take it in hands.
I have recognised how foolhardy a thing I was doing in crossing a matter touching the constituency of Deputy MacBride. I did not say what he attributed to me, that the place was infected with tuberculosis, nor did I choose it because it was in any way singular. I chose it because it was a place I knew, and there were families I knew in it. While making this explanation I want to say that the biggest single evil of such parts of the country is tuberculosis. I want to add, however, this much, that from my personal observations I know that nearly always the scourge can be traced to a house. I have a case in mind, one of five or six which I can give and one which Deputy MacBride can go and test, where within two years four out of a family of five, one after the other, were stricken, simply because the house was infected, and the fifth fled the island although infected before he fled the island. The last I heard of him when he returned to Achill was that he was entirely cured. Had he not gone, he would be where the remainder of his family are. I only say that now. I repeat what I said a few moments ago, that the greatest benefit that can be given is the benefit of education. Deputy MacBride says those persons when they are infected can be treated in the infirmary. I know they can be treated in the infirmary, but I am inclined to think, from having seen some of them going to the infirmary, that they would have been even better to remain in their own homes. They are being sent to sanatoria like Newcastle, and other places. What happens when they do go there? After a few weeks the bed is required for some other case. There are too many demanding admittance, and so the patient has to be returned home. I have handled 20 or 30 cases like that within two years, and they have to go back again into the infected houses. If the matter is to be handled, medical treatment will be required. Many forms of treatment will be required. Proper schoolhouses and proper nutrition will be required, but I do say that the most important matter of all is not any of those, but propaganda and proper education.
There was one point mooted by my namesake and fellow-Deputy from Clare. It has reference to making tuberculosis a notifiable disease. I am afraid at the present time that it would be premature, for I am aware that, in the few areas where the local councils have made it a notifiable disease, the results have been far from satisfactory, and have been disappointing. When the disease is notified after any case is detected, or when the disease is notified to the Public Health Authority, it unfortunately becomes common knowledge, and it very often happens that the family of which the affected person is a member becomes somewhat ostracised. So there is a natural tendency to conceal the existence of the disease. I rather think that when the Local Government Bill becomes law, as we are all agreed on the necessity for the existence of a county medical officer of health, he would be the proper authority and the proper person to receive notification of the existence of the disease, and treat it as confidential as coming from a patient to a physician. At the present time, having regard to the fact that it is broadcasted within a very short time, if any person has the disease he and his family become shunned by the neighbours, and it is not wise, it is not fair, and it is prejudicial to public health to have it a notifiable disease. I do not agree that we can regard consumption as really due to malnutrition. As a matter of fact many persons have been stricken with the disease who were in comfortable circumstances of life, and it would be invidious to draw such conclusion. Then again, I look more to education and to dissemination of proper information to detect the disease in the incipient stages and diagnose it, and to have early treatment. I believe, as well, that we must, to a very large extent, go on preventive rather than curative hygiene, coupled with curative pathology, ere we can eradicate the trouble.
I fear that Deputy Figgis has lost his vocation in this matter as well as in other matters. He should be the new Minister for Public Health, just as he might have been the Minister for Finance or the Minister for Reconstruction. Now, in Achill there is a very clever medical practitioner, and he ought to know the number of people who are suffering from tuberculosis in this island of Achill that Deputy Figgis tells us is reeking with tuberculosis. In addition to that medical officer there are in the island several clergymen, who I am to assume, from their position, ought to be at least educated in this as well as in other matters, and it would be part of their duty to see that these people were properly taken care of. Then there is a county tuberculosis officer whose duty it is to see about these matters. I object to the people of Achill or any other part of Mayo being slandered in this way. It is not the Duchess of this or that or the other who is now parading the land. It is a member of this Dáil and it is quite uncalled for in any Deputy to stand up and traduce not only the people of Mayo but the medical officer and the people in charge of the Achill district, and the medical officer in charge of the county. We have in this Dáil Deputy Nally, who is practically chairman of the Mayo County Council and has a knowledge of the tuberculosis cases that come out of Achill. I do not suppose that any of them are sent to England, or that any of them are sent forward depending on the charity of friends of the Deputies here in this House or in any other House. I am sure if the Island of Achill, or any other part of Mayo, is reeking with tuberculosis the chairman of the county ought to know.
I think the Deputies present hardly realise the fact that nearly all of the 26 counties have got a tuberculosis medical officer, who is a whole-time officer. All these officers hold dispensaries in the various towns, and any of the patients who come before them are sent to a sanatorium. The patients from Mayo are sent to the sanatorium at Peamount, and I understand that Peamount has not been overcrowded at any time for the past five years. My experience is that the Local Government Department have been doing all they can to stamp out tuberculosis at its source.
I want to say one word as to my remarks in relation to this matter for fear they might be taken as a reflection on the local tuberculosis officers or nurses. I would say that the work done by these people in my county, and I am sure in the other counties, has been excellent. The suggestion that I want to make is that schemes have not been as elaborate as they might be and probably not so well financed by the Ministry of Local Government or given the attention which the importance of the matter deserves.
May I say I was very pleased to listen to the very interesting and informative debate on this question. The only thing I regret was that it did not occur during the Second Reading of my Local Government Bill, where it would have fitted in admirably, because the arguments addressed to this subject here are arguments specially in favour of that Bill.
And the abolition of rural councils?
I agree with most of the Deputies who have spoken that the chief cause for the high percentage of consumption relatively in this country is the absence of any real understanding of the preventive side of public health, and also it is due to the fact that the disease is not compulsorily notifiable. It would be impossible to organise a proper propaganda system in this country until we have Local Government established on a county basis and have an officer in charge of the medical service in each county. I am surprised that Deputy Hogan did not notice that under that Bill tuberculosis is to be made compulsorily notifiable. In regard to the other matter raised by Deputy Hogan, the re-organisation of National Health Insurance and the co-ordination of it with other medical services are being referred to a committee which is being formed by the Minister for Finance. That disposes of his other difficulty. Deputy Corish referred to the outbreak of sleeping sickness. Every outbreak is being investigated by the medical inspectors and inquiries in the other cases that arise are being made. The Local Government authorities in some cases have made the disease notifiable. It has been made notifiable in the case of Rathmines and Dublin. With regard to the general position of tuberculosis, the disease is decreasing. Of course, it is a very tedious disease and it is a very difficult thing to give exactly the reasons why it is decreasing. I believe it is owing to the curative and preventive system introduced here in 1912 and 1914, but it may to some extent be due to the standard of living.
Hear, hear.
Of course that is very important. The mortality from tuberculosis is decreasing. The death-rate from the disease in Ireland per thousand of the population varied from 2.9 in 1904 to 2.7 in 1914. During the great war, from 1915 to 1919, the figure rose to 2.2 and in 1919 it dropped to 1.94. The reduction continued through 1920, when it was at 1.7, and in 1921 it was 1.5. The figure for the Free State for 1922 was 1.4. We have not got the returns for last year. Approved tuberculosis schemes are being administered by councils in twenty counties and two county boroughs, while partial schemes dealing only with insured persons and their dependents are being carried out by Insurance Committees.
In Mayo and Leitrim the approved schemes have fallen into abeyance. Tuberculosis schemes have not been adopted in Cork, Longford and Roscommon, and in Cork and Limerick County Boroughs. On the whole, we have reason to be satisfied with the decrease in the disease, but until the disease is made compulsorily notifiable, and until we are in a position to start a proper information bureau on the subject, which can only be done when we have set up our county medical service, we cannot expect to make any more rapid advance than we are making, and that is rather slow.
What is the attitude of the Ministry of Local Government in connection with the question of the provision of houses for agricultural labourers? A great deal of confusion prevails in different rural areas in view of the fact that there were many schemes approved immediately prior to or about the time of the European war, and rural district councils had embarked on certain schemes which had entailed a certain amount of expenditure. They had acquired sites, and had gone through the initial stages of the schemes, and spent an amount of money. I would like to know if any of the money that was alleged to have been earmarked for the different rural areas at that period is available now.
What is the attitude of the Ministry generally in connection with the provision of houses for rural labourers? I do not suppose it will be suggested by the Minister or anybody here that an agricultural labourer could take advantage of the recent Housing Bill, because even the minimum rent for a three-roomed house would be out of all proportion to what an agricultural labourer could be expected to pay. The Minister ought to give some indication of his attitude on this matter. By no stretch of the imagination could anybody conceive that the Government's latest housing effort could cater for the rural labourer.
I am not quite sure if Deputy Corish is correct in his last statement, because I know the recent Housing Bill is being availed of much more eagerly in rural districts than in urban areas.
On a point of explanation, I have no doubt the Bill will be availed of so far as rural areas are concerned. I think, however, that the Minister will find on examination that it is not the rural labourer who is going to build houses. The Bill is not limited to workers, and he will find that the builders will be small or large farmers who are people better able to afford the money than the labourers.
I am not in a position to go into detail as to the type of person who is building those houses in all parts of the country. All I know is that we are getting far more demands from the rural districts than from the urban areas. With regard to the general question of labourers' cottages, we have built 41,000 of these cottages already, and I do not think any other country in Europe has made such provision for rural labourers. Under the Labourers Acts of 1906, loans were advanced to rural district councils on what are known as land purchase terms, repayable by an annuity covering principal and interest, of £3 5s. for every £100, for a period of 68½ years. The Act of 1906 provided that only 64 per cent. of the interest charges would have to be met out of the local rates, the remainder being met by the Government out of the Labourers Cottage Funds, which, in addition to interest accruing on capital investments of the fund, receive the amount voted under sub-heads (i) and (j).
The general financial position at present does not permit of the immediate provision of State assistance for rural houses. The terms on which advances were heretofore made have, in the course of time, become unduly onerous on the State as a result of the depreciation of the land stock by which the necessary monies were raised. We are not in the position to go ahead with any more of these labourers cottage schemes. In proportion to other sections of the community, those for whom labourers' cottages were provided have fared very well.
The only question that arises here is the 1919 Act.
I had not noticed that until now.
I had noticed it all the time, but I would like to give Deputies a certain amount of latitude. The Minister has made a statement on sub-heads (i) and (j).
Am I debarred from speaking on this matter?
I am afraid so, unless the Deputy knows more about the 1919 Act than I do.
I was anxious to express my appreciation of the Minister's tribute to the district councils.
On this sub-head S, "Grant to Municipal Authorities under Government Housing Scheme," I would like to know what particular scheme is referred to. I understood that the local authorities had nothing to do with the last housing scheme.
This is the unexpended balance of the President's housing scheme.
There is nothing available for the local authorities as that is all earmarked.
The next item, sub-head T, is concerned with the housing scheme we have been dealing with and I would ask, can the Minister give us any information, other than what he has given, as to the extent to which this scheme is being availed of. He said that much more had been done in the rural areas than in the urban areas. I think that is a misfortune becauses houses are much more needed in the urban areas. If my information is correct a lot of these housing schemes in the rural areas are undertaken by individuals on the strength of the £60 Government grant, and in the hope that when they have spent the £60, the Government will again come to their rescue and enable them to finish the house. In one part of the country I have heard that that has happened. Deputy Corish said it was being done by the small farmers. My information is that it is done more by small tradesmen, tailors and men of that kind. They start to build a house on the assumption that the £60 is a first instalment, and they hope that the next will follow in good time. If the Minister could give any light on this matter I think it would be helpful and it might disabuse false impressions that have arisen.
I am afraid that those enthusiastic builders will meet with an unpleasant surprise when they come to the Treasury, after they have expended the £60, to look for further recoupment. By the way, they do not get £60 as a full quota at first. They only get that in full when the building is complete. They get 50 per cent. when the building is roofed, and the remainder when it is completed. I receive about 600 or 700 letters per day inquiring about these houses. A great many of these letters say that the parties writing them intend to start construction work immediately and, from all the indications we have had so far, we believe that the grant will be expended this year or fully availed of this year. At this stage it is impossible to say exactly how many have started building. I would not be in a position to give such definite information till probably a month or so later.
I would like to ask the Minister is it possible for his department to make any money available for local bodies who wish to acquire land in order to be able to present sites to people who wished to build houses under the new Act? I know a case where there is military land available. The local authorities are willing to acquire it, and the people are willing to build upon it if the local authority can be financed in the acquisition of it.
According to the Bill the local authorities have power to borrow up to twice the amount of the grant supplied by the Government, and the money borrowed in that particular case will not be taken into consideration when the statutory borrowing limit of the local authority is being calculated, so I think that completely covers the case Deputy Heffernan has put forward.
Now about this £6,000?
Which £6,000. Is it the £6,000 that is not being expended?
"Pensions and gratuities awarded." What I want to know is what it was actually expended upon last year?
That question should have been asked last year, I am afraid.
Question:—"That a sum, not exceeding £628,365, be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1925, to defray the salaries and expenses of the Ministry of Local Government, including grants and other expenses in connection with housing, grants to local authorities, and sundry grants in aid, and the expenses of the office of the inspector of lunatic asylums"—put and agreed to.