Private Business. - Vote No. 70.—Relief Schemes. – Dáil Éireann (6th Dáil) – Wednesday, 26 Nov 1930

Private Business. - Vote No. 70.—Relief Schemes.

Minister for Finance (Mr. Blythe)

I move:—

"Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £300,000 chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1931, chun sintiúisí i gcóir fóirithinte ar dhíomhaointeas agus ar ghátar.

That a sum not exceeding £300,000 be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1931, for contributions towards the relief of unemployment and distress."

Relief votes have been passed by the Dáil in previous years and on certain occasions substantially larger sums than that now asked for were voted. The largest sum voted was in 1924-25, amounting to £500,000. It is felt that in the present circumstances the sum now asked for is ample to do all that can be done in this way to relieve such exceptional unemployment and distress as exist and that it is quite adequate to meet the situation. The reports that are available do not indicate that there are the difficulties in the country that were here, say, in 1924-25. The variation in the registered number of unemployed, as compared with previous years, is very small and, while undoubtedly the economic situation has been adversely affected by the weather, the position generally is not at all of the alarming sort which we experienced on one or two previous occasions. In addition to this sum which is now being voted there are, of course, large amounts in the various Votes which tend directly or indirectly to promote employment. There are large sums in the Office of Public Works Vote for new works and additions to the extent of about £420,000. There is available in the Local Loans Vote for improvement works which will be carried out by local authorities a sum of £550,000. There is a vote of over £140,000 for drainage. There are housing grants in the Local Government Vote to the extent of £217,000. The Land Commission has available for improvements on estates a sum of over £211,000. Under the Gaeltacht housing scheme a sum will be available for grants of £60,000. Under the heading "Forestry" a sum of £43,000 is available for cultural operations. In addition, there is a substantial sum in the Property Losses Compensation Vote which will be expended on the erection of buildings.

Broadly speaking, the amounts available for works which give direct employment do not fall very far short of £2,000,000. In addition, there will be an outlay in connection with the operations of the Electricity Supply Board of a substantial amount. There are, of course, big allocations from the Road Fund amounting to a sum of £850,000. In addition to the £550,000 which I have already mentioned in connection with grants-in-aid to the Local Loans Fund, there will be a further sum available of over £100,000. There are, as I have said, very big sums provided out of votes for the provision of employment which will actually provide employment for very large numbers of people. The relief votes have been expended in the past, so far as the main portion of them was concerned, partly through the Local Government Department or local bodies and partly through the Land Commission. Local bodies have been given percentage grants to enable them to carry out certain works. For instance, a local authority contemplating, say, a new water scheme has been induced to go ahead by being given a free grant of 25 per cent. or some other proportion. In that way a good deal of employment has been procured and good work has been done.

The Land Commission has expended money on drainage schemes, various improvement schemes such as the making of bog roads, and other minor works. Sometimes in the desire to expend the whole of the relief grants before the end of the year, there may have been mistakes made and not quite the best value obtained for the money spent in all cases. We desire as far as possible in this instance to make sure that the fullest value will be got for all the money expended, and we propose that, if there is any proportion of the sum which cannot be expended before the end of the year, it shall be re-voted and that any works which are undertaken shall be completed. In one or two cases it happened that the works were not completed, and while they were not altogether useless their value was not so much in the incompleted stage as it would be in the completed stage. In this instance we will make an attempt to map out the expenditure so that we will not start on a larger scale than can be carried out with the sum mentioned in the Estimates. If that cannot be carried out before the end of the year then the proper proportion of the Vote will appear again in the Estimates to enable the works to be finally completed.

Another factor which has been already mentioned, in addition to the effects of the bad harvest weather, which induced the Government to propose this Vote to the Dáil, was the fact that there are indications that the areas in which receipts of money from America is an important item are likely to suffer this year. Many reports have come to the Government, and they seem to be true, that the same sum will not be available owing to depression in America as had been available in other years. That would be a factor in considering the geographical distribution of the grant so far as it can be controlled. Of course, so far as the amount in urban areas is concerned, it cannot be very well controlled.

In certain districts either the local authority has no scheme or they moved too late to enable anything to be done. In the year of the first Vote, 1924-25, the amount actually expended was £385,000 out of a total grant of £550,000. Of that, a sum of £133,600 was paid out in grants to local authorities. A sum of £186,000 was expended by the Land Commission on these improvement works such as drainage, bog roads and the actual improvement of the estates. An additional £23,000 went to the Forestry Department for doing extra forestry work in that year. The remainder was spent in smaller schemes. There was a fuel and schools meal scheme that year which cost £16,800. In the year 1925-26 the actual amount expended was £336,000. Of that, local authorities got £175,500, and the Land Commission expended on improvement work £137,000, while the Forestry Department got £11,500. Then in the year 1927-28 the amount expended was £101,000 odd. Public Health schemes absorbed £48,900 and improvement works by the Land Commission £51,480.

Mr. de Valera

When the President first intimated to the House that it was his intention to introduce the Estimate, he said that it was of course a temporary expedient to meet a temporary situation. I suppose there is no doubt that it is nothing more than a temporary expedient. We can all agree on that, but that it is a temporary situation is something on which we at least beg leave to differ with the President.

As far as we can judge, we have in this country for several years past a position in which a very large number of our people are unemployed and our complaint is that the Executive Council, instead of dealing with this situation as a whole and adopting constructive plans which would be a permanent remedy, were satisfied now and again when things got particularly bad to adopt temporary expedients such as this. The President in his statement painted in very glowing terms the position of this country, and those of us who are at all in contact with the people know that that picture is not justified. We know that at present and during the last seven or eight years the economic conditions in our country certainly do not deserve to be characterised by the terms that were used by the President. Of course, the members on the opposite benches are anxious to make it appear that under their benign rule everything has been splendid in this country. They have been talking all the time; when facts have been pointed out to them they said—"Oh, we have just turned the corner." The very fact that a Vote like this is at all necessary is a proof that the President does not believe his own statement, that he does not believe that the picture he has painted is justified and that he feels compelled, because he knows the public do not believe it either, to come along and introduce a Vote of this particular kind. As I have said, the position is such that it justifies the House in passing a Vote of this kind. But it also justifies us in censuring the Executive because steps have not been taken which would lead to a permanent cure. When motions like this were before the House before we tried to make our position on the matter clear, to make it clear that we believed it was the duty of the Executive to see that those who were prepared and willing to work and were out of work not through their own fault would be given a livelihood. In other words, that work, or an equivalent if work cannot be found, should be provided for the citizens who are entitled to a livelihood.

In making our criticisms we have tried time after time to indicate that there was a direction in which we could move and provide that employment. We have indicated that if we concentrated on producing for ourselves the things which we are at present giving employment to the foreigner to produce, we could give employment to a number larger than the number we have had at any time unemployed, and that if that plan were adopted we would very soon with our present population and relatively undeveloped resources get into a position in which temporary expedients and doles of this sort would not be necessary. The President in making his statement wanted to blind us to the facts of the situation, that during the last six or seven years our population has diminished, that the land under tillage has diminished, that the number of head of cattle has diminished, and that our output of wealth has gone down by an amount which is, at least, five and a half millions yearly. Instead of meeting these figures and either explaining how they could be consistent with this state of prosperity which he spoke of or of meeting them in any other way he simply avoids them and tells us that the adverse trade balance, for instance, has gone down from something like 19.2 millions, which I think it was, in the peak year—to a little over 10 millions. I think the reduction was 47 per cent. If that diminution of the adverse trade balance was accompanied by increased production then we could believe perhaps that a satisfactory state had begun to be reached. But it is not accompanied by increased production. It is accompanied by a diminishing production. It is reduced at the same time that we have diminished production. When we examine it we find it is much more likely to be explained by a diminished standard of living than by causes on which we can congratulate ourselves. The fact is that the standard of living is going down, that our people are being driven out on account of that and on account of the fact that a large number of them can get no livelihood at all.

When we see, for instance, the milch cows being sold out, when a farmer sells out his stock—which is the basis of the principal industry, the one which is most favoured by the Government—we can come to one conclusion only, and that is that the pressure of circumstances forces him to part with the material for future production. I cannot read into it anything else, and when that is so we cannot see how it is that the President can find such comfort in the fact that the adverse balance of trade is reduced. As a matter of fact, the total amount of the visible adverse trade balance since the present Executive came into office since 1923, let us say, has been £98,000,000. The greater part of that corresponds to a reduction in national wealth. That, taken in conjunction with the diminution of wealth caused by emigration, which has totalled up something between £200,000 and £240,000 in the time, represents a sum which is really colossal if we try to put it in figures at all and try to understand it; and every year while that is taking place we have got this special drain to which we have time and again called attention, the land annuities and the other sums paid out here year after year and, in our opinion, unnecessarily. When we realise that the burden of those payments on our people represents a burden which is relatively greater than the burden of the war reparations upon the German people, we ought not to be surprised when we really examine the situation, and not paint a picture of it for the purposes which the President has in mind, that the real examination reveals a very serious situation for this country.

There is very little use in repeating things. We have said here from these benches time after time, that with the present constitution of the House it does not matter what we say, it is not even taken to the public who would be the masters of the majorities in this House. All we can hope for is that by repetition little by little the people may come to take a real interest in the situation as a whole. Each citizen looks upon the situation more in regard to his own self than in regard to the community as a whole. That is quite natural. Those who are particularly badly hit are scarcely conscious of the fact that the state in which they find themselves is shared by their neighbours and that it really demands an effort on behalf of the whole population and in particular an effort by the Executive, who should give the lead in this matter, to get us out of that situation. Small doles and temporary expedients of this sort are not the way to tackle the situation in which we have found ourselves.

What will £300,000 do, even granted that it is administered as carefully as it can be? Count it in the amount of wages, in the support that it is able to give. The statistical bulletin of the League of Nations shows that in all probability at the present time, taking the way in which the figures have moved for months past and in previous years, the present number of unemployed as given in those figures ought to be something like 27,000. That is those who are in insurable occupations. Suppose there were no more unemployed in this country and suppose you were to give as small an amount relatively as £2 a week, how long would this £300,000 support a family dependent on these people? A very short time indeed—probably not six weeks. If this was really a temporary situation in which six weeks' relief to the people who were registered on the unemployed list were given, then a Vote like this would be a real boon and would be justifiable of its own account, but it is not, and the question is, whatever people benefit to the extent of £2 a week, when the six weeks are up is anything further going to be done? Is the President prepared to come along with a further Vote in six weeks' time to meet the further needs of those whom this is intended to relieve? There is, as far as I can see, no effort being made by the Executive. They have put their faces definitely against the only direction in which we can see permanent relief can be granted. The effect of this temporary expedient will lapse after six weeks if it goes nearly meeting the present need. If the full amount were spent weekly in giving maintenance or employment, taking the smallest figure at which we can take our unemployed, it would maintain them only for six weeks. Is it not time that we had something more than this? I feel we will never tackle this question properly until we make up our minds that we have a definite duty to look after these people who are starving at present. In every direction there is work of a valuable character to be done which would increase our productive powers for the future and give us a sort of capital asset for the future. It will take money, no doubt. It will take a big combined effort of the whole community to carry these enterprises out, but they are well worth it. There is a shortage of houses. Why not instead of giving doles and grants set out to give employment to the building trades and at the same time provide for our people the houses without which they cannot be efficient members of our community? There is work for one large section of the community, and I believe it would be more economical for the State to start on big schemes of that kind, to be continued for a considerable period, than it will be trying to tinker with a serious situation in the way the present Executive are tinkering with it.

Then there is the question of reclaiming land. There is still a large amount of land that can be reclaimed. At present, perhaps, in the depressed state of agriculture it may not be immediately valuable property, but there is no doubt it can be made so for the future. It is increasing the natural wealth of the country. It is very much better than giving sums out as they are being given out at present in a way which does not get the best results, to say the very least of it. It is doubtful what the result may be. In fact, in many cases the results are quite the opposite from the results we want to secure, but with constructive work, with the question of housing, with the question of reclamation of land, with the question of providing proper sanitary systems for some country towns, works of that particular character with a definite object in view and with plans for a continued period in advance are all very much better than these haphazard temporary expedients the Government is putting forward—I will not say constantly, even this temporary expedient is only resorted to when they are really pushed to it. As I have indicated our attitude to this matter so often, there is very little use in speaking to benches when you are satisfied that there is going to be no response from the majority; there will be probably others speaking about the particular manner in which this money will be administered and as far as I am concerned I will simply say that I am dissatisfied with this particular way of dealing with the question. I will vote for it, but I vote for it simply because it is better to keep people for six weeks than not to keep them at all, even the number that would be affected by this, but I still maintain it is not the way to deal with this situation.

Mr. T.J. O'Connell

I am glad that the Government have recognised that there was a necessity for putting this Vote on the Estimate and bringing it before the Dáil. I was glad to hear the Minister in introducing the Vote make the statement—and I think it was new coming from him—that generally speaking, very good work was done in the past by means of these Votes. Usually when the plea was put from these benches for a Vote of this kind we had the argument that work of this kind was usually uneconomic, that the money was not spent economically, and much the same thing has been stated by the leader of the Fianna Fáil Party who has just sat down, that it was his opinion that good results do not follow from money spent in this way. I do not agree at all. I do not think there is any justification for that statement and if good work does not follow the fault is not inherent in the system of giving grants but in the administration. I must say that I was thoroughly disappointed with the Minister's opening speech, and with the lack of information he gave to the House as to the method in which he proposed to have the money spent. He told us what was done on previous occasions. But—whether he overlooked it or not I do not know— he did not state in what particular direction the money was to be spent. Perhaps the Minister would see his way to say whether it is to be, generally speaking, spent in the same way as before?

General Mulcahy

More or less; yes.

Mr. O'Connell

That is what I wanted to know, because I would say that, generally speaking, the method in which the last Relief Vote was spent was about as satisfactory a method as could be adopted. There is no doubt that there are many schemes which local authorities would wish to put into operation, but which they are afraid as it were to tackle owing to the burden which these schemes would place on the immediate ratepayers. While I have not always a very great amount of sympathy with the point of view expressed in that way, and while I believe that it is not a question of the burden on the rates so much as the service that was given, I do feel that the principle of a grant of this kind acts as a kind of stimulus as it were to the local authorities to go ahead with very useful work which otherwise they might neglect for a very long time. In that way these grants are specially useful. I do think they do act as a stimulus to the local authority to engage in the work of striking a rate in order to do work which otherwise they would not be inclined to tackle. As we know from experience all through the country, especially in the matter of sewerage and waterworks and sanitation generally, there is a great deal of work now to be done.

This work is very pressing. So far as this grant will give an encouragement to that kind of work it will prove extremely useful. The other class of work which has been done under the previous schemes has been necessary and useful work too. These are works which in the main are in the nature of improvements to estates. Bog roads have been mentioned on many occasions. They would not be the kind of roads that the county council would make. There are many other directions in which this money could be usefully spent and at the same time serve the purpose for which it was originally and really intended, that is, to give employment to a number of people who are unemployed. I include amongst these small farmers and the sons of small farmers, who are unemployed all through the country as a result of the various circumstances which prevail at the present moment.

Reference has been made to the bad harvest and to the depression in prices and how these things have affected the small farmer. We know, too, that between 600 and 700 railway men have been dismissed or are about to be dismissed from their employment in the Great Southern Railways. These are men employed on the permanent way —men of the general labourer type. That adds to the normal unemployment that exists in the country. I should like to say here, and I do not think it is necessary to repeat it, that we on these benches, just as the Fianna Fáil Party, never regarded these grants given in this way as anything more than a temporary expedient. We do not regard them as a solution of the unemployment question. It is not true to state, as has been stated by a prominent member of the Fianna Fáil Party quite recently, that the outlook of the Labour Party is bounded by relief grants. There is no justification for a statement of that kind. We have on many occasions put forward the arguments which have just been put forward by the Leader of the Opposition; we put these arguments forward long before the Fianna Fáil Party came into this House. Very important solutions of the unemployment problem have been put forward by us. We believe that a permanent solution could be found if it were tackled in the right way. We put forward the argument that even if industry were organised to provide employment for the general mass of our people there would be always times and periods in which there would be a greater or lessor number of men unemployed. There ought to be some provision whereby on occasions of this kind work would be provided for the unemployed, work which would be a benefit to the country as a whole. We think it is not difficult or impossible to get matters so arranged that that can be done.

There is not a great deal more to say on this matter. The necessity for a grant is admitted on all sides of the House. There is not much use in going into details or suggestions as to how the money should be spent, because we know the lines on which the previous money was spent, and we have it now, generally speaking, that this money will be spent on the same lines. I was glad that the Minister made it quite clear that it would not be necessary to rush the expenditure so that all the money would be spent, or as much as possible of it, before 31st March next. That undoubtedly was a flaw in the previous grants. There was a tendency under those grants that the schemes would be rushed without having received the proper consideration that they should receive. I do not think that that will be done on this occasion, because I believe that the money will be largely expended on schemes which were put up perhaps three or five years ago to the Government, and which are already there waiting to be financed. I think that spending a certain amount of money on a scheme, and leaving that scheme uncompleted afterwards because it had not been completed before 31st March, was a thoroughly uneconomic way of dealing with the matter. I do not say that that was done on a great many occasions, but it happened on a few occasions. I heard of roads to be built, and these roads were built up to the last quarter of a mile, but because that portion remained uncompleted they are quite useless since. I know of one such road. All the money expended on that road is quite useless because of its not being completed. What the Minister said when introducing the Estimate is satisfactory in respect to this matter of the completion of schemes after 31st March. The Minister told us that schemes will not be left uncompleted because the end of the financial year has come before the work has been finished. I do not think it is necessary for me to enlarge on this matter any further. The necessity is admitted, and the grant has been made. I agree with Deputy de Valera that this grant will not go very far. I do not think it will meet the position that exists at the present time. I believe that owing to the factors which have been mentioned there will be very considerable distress, especially along the west and south coast, because of the failure of the usual letters and cheques that come from America, but, such as it is, I welcome the action of the Government in making this grant.

Mr. G. Wolfe

There is no doubt that since last July up to the present we have had the most awfully wet weather that I suppose the majority of us have ever experienced. I can look back to a good many years, and I can remember no year worse than the present except the year 1879. In that year there was this difference, that it rained about the same number of days, or longer, than at present, but, unlike this year, the crops that year did not ripen at all. I saw at that time wheat cut down, close to me, unripe. That did not happen this year. In fact, in some areas the position has been deceptive. Some districts have been hit very severely, while others close by have not come off quite so badly. I speak as a farmer myself, and I do a fair amount of mixed tillage and other kinds of farming. I confess that in my estimate as to the way in which the crops were affected that I was quite wrong.

I managed to get some oats cut with the reaper and binder. It was standing up better than in many other years. In fact, there was not one bit of it down. Nevertheless, when it came to be threshed the yield was only a little more than half of what it was last year. I thought my hay would be ruined. I had a great many acres lying for weeks unturned on the ground. I thought it was absolutely done for. When it came to be gathered together a great deal of it had not the appearance of being wet at all, even after four or five weeks. In the case of hay that I had partly made up it was a very different story. It fermented and was not very much good. Nevertheless, I have been able to get it in, and all of it, in a way, will be usable. Again, in regard to potatoes, with many people it appeared as if everything would be ruined and that the crop would be very bad. The contrary has turned out to be the case, and there has even been an increase made upon last year. Of course that does not apply everywhere. It applies more to high ground. Those who unfortunately, had low-lying ground for tillage have a different story to tell. Another curious thing is that some of the very small people who, perhaps, had an acre under oats, did very much better than people like myself, who had a very much larger portion of tillage. I allowed two men to have their oats threshed along with mine. They had about ten barrels apiece. Their oats were infinitely better than mine, though I had a great deal more assistance than they had; they probably did all the work themselves. They were men with three or four acres each.

It has been a terribly bad year, and this applies more especially to the towns than to the country. I do not think there is such widespread poverty as in the year 1924-25. At the same time I am sure that there is a very great deal. I judge by the number of applications that I have received, and I consider that the poverty is not so great as in 1924-25. I know that there is great distress in very many places. I have seen oats cut like hay and bundled together—not at all made up in stooks. Kildare is an exception, but I know that that condition of things in other parts of the country is far from uncommon. I have no doubt that there is a need for assistance, and the Government are going on the right lines in recognising the necessity and voting money for the purpose. I agree with Deputy O'Connell that the money ought to be spent on objects that will last and that will be of service to the country. I hope all the money will not be devoted to the roads. There are drainage and sewerage works that are badly required in some country towns. Such works will be of lasting benefit to those towns. In my own area, I know that the towns are suffering more than the country. That is the case so far as Kildare is concerned. Though this money may not be sufficient, at the same time the Government are wise in not issuing a larger sum of money at first. The amount can always be increased and, if it is shown to be necessary, I have no doubt that if the matter is brought to the Government's notice there will be no failure on their part to see that distress is alleviated as far as lies in their power to alleviate it.

Mr. M. O'Reilly

I am sorry I could not say that the constituency from which I come is without distress. The clearest indication of distress is the gradual rise in home help. I fear that this year it will rise. Of course that has been caused largely by want of employment during the summer season. The farmers were unable to carry out their usual work; in fact they were unable to carry out ordinary work owing to the poor weather, and the result was that labourers were unable to earn anything in a good many places. Home help seems to be in greater demand.

My reason for rising on this occasion is for the purpose of asking the Minister to consider a scheme that has been mentioned here for the last two or three years. I refer to a water supply and sanitary scheme for the town of Oldcastle. The area of charge for that scheme, which is practically prepared, is a peculiarly poor area. It is an area that suffered very severely in the last season. A grant in that case would, no doubt, help to bring this scheme to a successful end. I think that the ratepayers who are to be assessed will practically refuse to pay owing to poverty and hardship; at least they will make such a protest as will damn the scheme. I know that the people are protesting with very good reason. I do not think that they are able to meet the extra expense. The greater part of the locality that is charged is very poor. The town which I have mentioned is noted for its fairs and markets. Probably the largest fairs in County Meath are held there, but the people who will be charged in the Oldcastle district are not the people who will go to those fairs, nor are they the people who will get whatever business or profit comes to the town. The people who benefit in that way are mostly those who come long distances I mentioned the scheme on a former occasion. I realise it is absolutely necessary that something should be done for that town. It has no water supply, it has no sanitary conveniences. The existing position is that the people who will be made liable are unable, especially after the present year, to meet the extra rate which will be struck. My only reason for rising was to mention that, and I trust the Minister will apportion some part of this money to that scheme.

Mr. T.J. Murphy

I am glad the omission in the speech of the Minister for Finance as to how this particular grant will be spent has been repaired by the Minister for Local Government and Public Health. I hope we will get more information from that Minister as to how the money will be allocated, and as to the manner in which it is proposed to spend it. I hope also that the Minister will be willing to receive suggestions as to the manner in which the money could be expended. I am anxious to suggest that the money should be made available as quickly as possible. I hope the Minister will take steps to ensure that at least a couple of weeks' wages will be paid to unemployed people before Christmas. The period round Christmas and immediately following it is unusually hard. That is the time when want in the home makes itself more felt. Perhaps the Minister will see the wisdom of making an effort to provide something for that period, and perhaps he will see that the money will not be alone earned but paid before Christmas. I am glad that the Minister has realised the necessity for meeting a particularly bad situation in the country. I welcome this grant very sincerely.

I would like to endorse what Deputy O'Connell has said. We never considered at any time that measures of this kind were anything like a permanent solution of the problem. We consider it rather a reproach to us all that such measures as this have to be taken. We have come to realise that expedients of this kind are necessary, not alone in this but in other countries where grave depression prevails. They help to tide over a bad situation until some permanent solution comes along. There is great need for the expenditure of money on different works in the country, and that need obtains very much in rural areas. As regards my constituency. I do not subscribe to a statement made here last week relating to the extent of unemployment in some of the towns. I assume the towns referred to were Kinsale, Bandon, Clonakilty, Bantry and Skibbereen. It was stated that approximately 7,000 people were idle. That statement is ridiculous; it is futile, hurtful and dangerous to make foolishly exaggerated statements of that kind. It clearly demonstrates that the person making them has little knowledge of the actual conditions prevailing. There is admittedly serious unemployment in that area, but it is ridiculous to suggest that in my town, where the population is 1,400 or 1,500, there are 1,000 people idle. There are probably 100 or 150 idle. Those people are in a bad condition, and I have reason to know it. The same thing applies to the other towns I have mentioned. There is an unemployed population of decent respectable people. They are anxious and willing to work if only they can get employed. It is on their behalf that we appeal to the Minister to devote a considerable portion of this money to useful work in this district. I regret that, and I think this House must have some responsibility for the fact that no provision has been made for it. I hope, as a result of this Vote, that some effort will be made to give them some hope in the immediate future.

I am particularly concerned with a good many rural areas in West Cork. Unfortunately, public works carried out by local authorities rarely afford any effective relief in these areas. I am concerned with a population of rural workers, a great many of whom are unemployed for most of the year and some of them casually employed with local farmers who are very little better off than themselves. Their position is extremely bad at present. As has been stated, that is reflected also in that constituency by a fairly substantial increase in the amount paid in home assistance. The problem in the rural areas in that constituency is urgent, and that is why I can see no great hope in the suggestion made by Deputy de Valera that in the expenditure of this money we should proceed along well-thought-out and well-planned lines. We cannot afford to wait. Well-planned housing schemes and other public works requiring thought and deliberation will hold us up too long, because the position arising out of the bad harvest and the persistent unemployment in most rural areas will compel us, if we are going to do anything to relieve the situation, to do it quickly and to do it in the absence of any elaborate or well-planned scheme, as has been suggested.

The point I am making has been established out of the mouth of the Minister for Finance when he referred to a sum approaching two millions available from other Votes for the direct or indirect relief of unemployment. That sum is not very much good. Perhaps I should not say it is not very much good, but what I do say is that it is not possible to avail of it readily. Take the Local Loans Fund. A substantial sum is available in that Fund for water and sewerage schemes, etc. The Minister for Local Government knows very well that the advocacy of schemes of that kind on local authorities is a particularly difficult one. One is continually met with the cry that no more burdens can be put on the harassed taxpayer, and every effort to promote works of this kind is obstructed, delayed and hindered. Consequently, money of that nature for the relief of an urgent and dangerous problem such as this is not as useful as if it were available for direct expenditure in a short time. I should like to see the Minister arming himself with further power if necessary to end menaces to public health that exist in a great many small towns, and some fairly large towns, and taking authority and power to deal with such matters from the public health point of view. I do not suggest that he should throw over altogether considerations of expense, but, bearing in mind, as possibly he is anxious to do, the demands and the needs of public health, he should put what pressure he considers necessary on authorities to have work of this kind executed. Perhaps the best pressure he could put on would be to allocate from this Fund certain sums in aid of schemes already in course of completion. I think it would be inadvisable to wait for two or three months until local authorities have planned out schemes for the expenditure of money. As the Minister has stated, money has been voted on other Votes for the erection of Gárda barracks and national schools. Money of that kind is not spent quickly. More than once we have seen money for public works of that kind re-voted in a subsequent Estimate. It is not much good to stress the fact that money of that kind is available when there is no chance of having it spent immediately, because the kernel of the situation is that it is urgent and that provision ought to be made in accordance with the urgency of the situation.

In that connection I should like to express the hope that the Land Commission will get a free and generous hand in spending money in the rural areas under this Vote. I am anxious to pay a tribute to the work carried out in the rural areas by the Land Commission in the years mentioned by the Minister. We have heard a lot in this debate, as we have heard often in this House before, about a poor return. I have had a very wide experience of the way in which the Land Commission expended money during that time and I saw not a very poor return, but a very good return given for the money.

I saw works of useful public importance that could never be carried out by local rates and the proof of the fact that these works were useful and necessary was that in many portions of West Cork the County Council took over the works which had been executed by the Land Commission. And very often I have heard general tribute paid to the necessity and value of the work carried out. With regard to the expenditure of money by the Land Commission, I hope the Minister for Finance will consider wiping out some of the irritating restrictions and regulations affecting the spending of money by the Land Commission. For instance in previous years the Land Commission would be precluded from spending money on estates that were vested. I suggest that in order to get the best value out of this grant, and to make certain that it is going to be effective in the worst districts, and relieve the most deserving cases, regulations of that kind should be wiped out, and that the Minister should take steps to make certain that the best results will be got from the expenditure of this money by taking the right type of districts and the right type of cases for improvement.

There is very little else that I need add to what has already been said by other Deputies. I would ask the Minister to notice the fact that, as Deputy O'Connell said, there are in many portions of the country schemes incompleted, although the money available in past years was spent on them. Works of that kind which were only half-finished ought to be again taken in hand. They offer a very ready opportunity for spending money. There are quite a number of such works in the constituency that I come from. I have no doubt there are similar works in many other constituencies. I do not want to mention any particular scheme. Matters of that kind are details which might be attended to afterwards, but I do hope the Minister will consider the necessity of finishing works of that kind. I say again I welcome this realisation of the position of the country. I am anxious to pay a tribute to useful and valuable work under a similar Vote in the past, and I feel that the expenditure of money of this kind in a direct and freehanded manner by a Department enables them to come in directly and do the work in hands, which justifies amply doing the work in that particular way.

Mr. Shaw

It has been most unfortunate that the unprecedented wet season has caused serious losses, and of course consequent unemployment. Farmers and people generally through the country are greatly disheartened, and are asking themselves is it ever going to stop raining. There has been very serious loss of crops of hay, of potatoes, and oats, and in a great many cases it is the poorest people and the people who can least afford it that met with these losses, those people living on the lowland and on the poor land. I would strongly advocate here that when this money is being allocated, some of it at least ought to be given to the relief of flooding. I know many people cut off from the main road, or the bog road if you like, that are simply prisoners in their own houses, surrounded by water on all sides. I do not think that people realise how serious it is. If you travel by train from here to Mullingar, or on to the West you will find that the country is a regular sea, and it is getting more serious every day.

I admit that I am not quite sure as to the procedure and I would like the Minister to make it perfectly clear what the procedure would be by the county councils or the public boards or any other body making a claim for portion of the money. Time is slipping along. We are running into December and we all agree that whatever money is allocated it ought to be given two or three weeks before Christmas. There are many schemes already passed by the local boards. There are housing schemes and sewerage schemes and there are also buildings in connection with mental hospitals, such as houses for attendants, in the constituency that I come from. I hope sanction will be expedited, because beyond doubt they will give very useful and necessary employment. I do not see that there is anything further to be done than for the Local Government Department and the other Departments to sanction loans and plans, and the Land Commission as well.

I would like to have some explanation with regard to the procedure, because there is a meeting of the Westmeath County Council to-morrow and I would like to be able to put them in a position to make application for the grant, because if it is not done to-morrow it cannot be done until after Christmas. I do not want to exaggerate the position at all. We all see the condition the country is in at the present time due to flooding. It is very serious. There have been very grave losses and grave sufferings, and I strongly appeal to have this money put into circulation as speedily and as soon as possible, because it was never worse wanted than at the present moment.

Seán T. O Ceallaigh

Tá vóta i gcóir £300,000 os ár gcomhair anois agus is dóigh liom gurab é an rud atá in intinn an Rialtais ná togha mór a bheith ann i gcionn sé míosa nó mar sin. Bhí droch-fhoghmhar ann gan amhras agus tá bochtanas agus gantanas i ngach áird den tír de bhárr an droch-fhoghmhar sin. Ach is beag cabhair bheidh ag dul do na daoine is boichte as an meid seo. Is é mo thuairim go mbeidh an gá is mó leis an airgead seo, do réir an Rialtais, ins na háiteacha ina bhfuil an cuid is mó de na daoine in aghaidh an Rialtais. Níl an Rialtas acht ag iarraidh dhá éan a mharbhú le haon chloich amháin.

Ní mar gheall ar an droch-fhoghmhar i mbliana atá bochtanas sa tír; anuraidh, agus an blian roimhe sin, bhí an bochtanas ag méadú. Thug an tUachtarán óráid uaidh seachtain o shoin ar staid na tíre agus rinne sé iarracht a chur ina luighe orainn go raibh an tír ag dul ar aghaidh go hiongantach agus go raibh an sgéal níos fearr i mbliana ná bhí sé anuraidh agus níos fearr an bhliain sin ná an bhliain roimhe sin. Acht ní mar sin atá an sgéal, do réir tuarasgabhála na Roinne Rialtais Aitiúla agus Sláinte Puiblí. Teasbánann an Tuarasgabháil sin go bhfuil níos mó daoine ag fáil cabhartha sa bhaile fá láthair óna Bórdaibh Puiblí ar fud na tíre ná bhí. Is dóigh liom go raibh an sgéal mar an gcéanna an bhliain roimhe sin. Ní chruthuíonn sin go bhfuil an tír ag dul ar aghaidh in aghaidh na bliana, mar adeir an tUachtarán.

Deir an Tuarasgabháil seo, leathanach 114,

"There was an increase in the number of persons in receipt of home assistance in the year ended March, 1927, as compared with March, 1926. In the Dublin, Balrothery, and Rathdown Unions representations were made as to the existence of exceptional distress. Upon the application of the Dublin County Council and the Commissioners of the County Borough of Dublin made in pursuance of Section 13 of the Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898, as regards the Dublin Union, and of the Dublin County Council as regards the Balrothery and Rathdown Unions, the Minister, by order, authorised the respective Board of Guardians of these unions to administer relief out of the workhouses on certain conditions for the periods herein specified."

Taisbeánann sin go raibh an sgéal dona go leor ar feadh na bliana sin agus tá an sgéal ag dul in olcas. Do réir an Tuarasgabhála céanna, leathanach 116, caitheadh £393,909 sa bliain 1924 chun cabhair do thabhairt do dhaoinibh sa mbaile agus an méid céanna beagnach ins na blianta 1925 agus 1926. Sa bhliain 1927 caitheadh £415,890 ar an gcabhair chéanna. Do réir na figiúirí seo, nílimíd ag dul ar aghaidh chó maith agus adeir an tUachtarán agus níl níos mo daoine ag fáil oibre, o bhliain go bliain, mar adubhradh seachtain o shoin sa tígh seo.

Ar leathanach 118, deir an Tuarasgabháil seo "from the foregoing table it would appear that the expenditure on home assistance is above the average in the seven counties—Clare, Cork (including Cork County Borough), Kildare, Louth, Waterford (including Waterford County Borough), Wicklow, Limerick County Borough, and in the Poor Law Unions of Dublin and Balrothery. The higher expenditure in the County Boroughs of Cork, Dublin, Waterford and Limerick was due to the greater poverty and distress that existed therein. In County Louth, the increased expenditure was incurred in the towns of Dundalk and Drogheda owing to unemployment in these areas."

Bréagnuíonn an Tuarasgabháil seo gach rud a dubhairt an tUachtarán mar gheall ar bhreis oibre a bheidh ar fáil ag na daoine agus mar gheall ar staid na tíre o bhliain go bliain. Tá Tuarasgabháil níos déanaí ná sin agus taisbeánann sé sin an rud céanna. Do réir an Tuarasgabhala sin—an treas Tuarasgabháil ón Roinn Rialtais Aitiúla agus Sláinte Puiblí—"The numbers at the end of each of the four years preceding 31st March, 1928, in comparison with the numbers on the 1st October, 1913, receiving assistance, were as follow:—

Home assistance cases, 1924-25, 21,650; 1925-26, 22,606; 1926-27, 23,649; 1927-28, 25,100. Children boarded out: 1924-25, 1,907; 1925-26, 1,906; 1926-27, 1,894; 1927-28, 1,890. In institutions: 1924-25, 18,113; 1925-26, 17,244; 1926-27, 17,281; 1927-28, 17,290.

"It will be seen," adeir an Tuarasgabháil, "that whilst in recent years the number in institutions and the number of children boarded out show little variation, home-assistance cases increased steadily, and that the total number of outdoor and indoor cases before 1927-28 exceed the figures for 1913 by 600."

Sin é an dul ar aghaidh atá ann! Sin é an solus atá ag teacht ar an tír de bharr obair an Rialtais. Tá Appendix insan leabhar céanna agus taisbeánann sin an dul ar aghaidh atá i mBhaile Atha Cliath. I ndeire na bliana 1925-26 bhí 8,103 daoine ag fáil cabhartha sa bhaile i mBaile Atha Cliath; sa bhliain 1926-27, bhí 8,755 ag fáil cabhartha sa bhaile; sa bhliain 1927-28, 10,030. Taisbeánann sin an t-ádh atá ar an tír. Do réir na Tuarasgabhala céanna, tá an méid daoine atá ag fáil cabhartha insna contaethe ag dul i méid feasta. I gContae Chabháin, i gContae Chorcaighe Thuaidh agus Thiar, i gContae Dhún na nGall, i gContae na Gaillimhe, Ciarraighe, Liadhtruim, Luimnigh, Muigheo, Muineacháin, Tiobrad Arann, Portláirge, Contae na hIarMhidhe agus Contae Loch gCarmain, tá an uimhir ag méadú. Acht a bé an cabhair a fuair na daoine seo, b'fhéidir go mbeidh siad ocrasach agus, leis an méid cabhartha a fuair siad, b'fhéidir go raibh siad ocrasach. Is léir ón méid sin nach ádh atá ar an tír, acht mí-adh ó chuaidh an Rialtas i gceannas.

Tá figiúirí eile insan Tuarasgabháil sin go mba mhaith liom é léigheamh amach acht ní dóigh liom go mbfiú é sin do dhéanamh. Is furrus an fhírinne d'fheiceáil ó na figiúirí do léigh mé amach cheana. Níor mhaith liom an sgéal do dhéanamh níos measa ná mar atá sé. Tá sé dona go leor agus nílim acht ag léigheamh na figiúirí atá insna Tuarasgabhála do chur an Rialtas amach. Cuireadh amach na Tuarasgabhála seo ag an Rialtas agus taisbeánann siad gur bréaga a bhí an tUachtarán dhá innsint nuair a dubhairt sé, seachtain o shoin, go raibh an tír seo níos fearr ná bhí sé cúpla bliain roimhe seo, agus go raibh sí níos saibhre ná a bhí le tamall fada. Ní ag dul ar aghaidh atámuid acht ag dul ar gcúl. Tá i bhfad níos mó daoine ag fáil cabhartha ó na Bordaibh Puiblí in aghaidh na mblianta. Ní théigheann na figiúirí níos déanaí ná dhá bhliain a shoin acht is dóigh liom go bhfuil an sgéal níos measa anois ná a bhí sé dhá bhliain o shoin. Do réir an méid eolais atá agam ar Chathair Bhaile Atha Cliath, tá an sgéal níos measa ná mar bhí.

Dubhairt an Teachta de Bhulbh tamall o shoin gur shaoil sé nach raibh an sgéal chomh dona agus a bhí, toisc nach raibh an méid daoine ag teacht chuige no ag sgríobhadh chuige ar lorg oibre. Ní mar sin atá an sgéal liom-sa. Gach seachtain atáim sa bhaile, tá a lán daoine ag teacht chugam ar lorg oibre agus tá a lán eile ag sgríobhadh chugam agus is dóigh liom go bhfuil an scéal céanna le hinnsint ag gach Teachta atá ina chomhnuidhe i mBaile Atha Cliath. Tá staid na Cathrach go dona. Ní creidim go raibh sé níos measa aon bhliain le n-ár gcuimhne. Do réir an méid daoine atá ag teacht chugam agus atá ag sgríobhadh chugam, isé mo thuairim go bhfuil an sgeul ag dul in olcas. Ní féidir liom obair d'fháil do níos mó ná a deichiú cuid de na daoine a thagas chugam. Nuair a bhí an tUachtarán ag cainnt, dubhairt sé gurab é a thuairim gur leor £300,000 don ócáid seo. Ní chreidim gur leor é. I mBaile Atha Cliath amháin tá gádh leis an méid seo, agus dá mbeadh £300,000 ar fáil bheadh gádh leis ar fud na tíre. Má roinnfear an méid seo, £3,000,000 idir na 26 contaethe ní bheidh acht tuairim £11,500 ag dul do Bhaile Atha Cliath. Ní féidir mórán congnaimh do thabhairt do na daoine bochta i mBaile Atha Cliath leis an méid sin. Tá súil agam go scapfar an t-airgead seo ins na háiteacha ar fud na tíre ina bhfuil gádh leis; acht tá súil agam nach ndéanfar dearmad ar na daoine atá díomhaoin i mBaile Atha Cliath. Tá fhios agam go bhfuil cuid aca ag fáil cabhartha nach bhfuair siad roimhe seo. Tá cuid aca ag fáil 2/6 no 5/- sa tseachtain agus cuid eile 15/- Acht is beag 15/- d'fhear agus bean agus triúr no ceathrar páistí. Tá na mílte daoine ann atá bocht agus ocrasach agus tá géar-ghádh leis an deontas seo. Tá fhios agam gur féidir leis an Rialtas an t-airgead seo do roinnt agus é do chaitheamh ar rudaí fiúntacha. Thiocfadh leis an Rialtais a lán rudaí a dhéanamh ar son sláinte na ndaoine ar fud na tíre. Tá uisce glan agus a lán nithe eile de dhíth ar na bailte beaga acht tá fhios agam freisin go bhfuil gádh le cuid maith den airgead chun teacht i gcabhair na ndaoine i mBaile Atha Cliath. Is féidir cuid maith den airgead seo a chaitheamh ar son sláinte na Cathrach agus tá súil agam nach ndéanfar dearmad ar mhuintir Bhaile Atha Cliath nuair a thiocfas an t-am chun an t-airgid do roinnt.

Mr. Colohan

I welcome this Vote inadequate though it is. I think the amount should have been three times what the Minister has put before us. My colleague, Deputy Wolfe, said he was glad the Minister was only looking for the amount in the Vote. He said if that amount was found not sufficient to cope with the distress that prevails that the Minister could bring in another Vote and ask the House to pass it. I hope that is true, that the Deputy has inside information on that point and that in three months' time we will have the Minister coming forward with a Vote for another £300,000.

Mr. Everett

You are an optimist.

Mr. Colohan

I am not an optimist. We all know that another Vote will be necessary to cope with the unemployment and distress that exist throughout the country. We are all well aware that, during the winter, a number of small farmers and labourers in the rural districts will be out of employment. The failure of the harvest will hit them very sorely. It is our duty to think of them, as well as of the large numbers that are unemployed and suffering acute distress in the towns. I hope the money proposed to be voted will be made available as rapidly as possible, and that work will be started at once. If we talk about sewerage and water schemes, I am afraid that will only mean delay. If such schemes are to be gone on with, I think we should be looking for more money. The sum of £300,000 is little enough to start immediate work. The Kildare Co. Council on Monday last, in discussing this Vote, decided to ask for a grant of £15,000. They made that demand on the grounds that the amount of home help paid out by their Board of Health is almost three times as large as the amount paid for the same purpose in other counties of similar size, valuation and population. I hope that when our County Council come to put their schemes before the Minister that he will consider them sympathetically.

Our county surveyor has given a list of some useful, necessary and urgent work that could be carried out at once. I have before me a list of 11 or 12 schemes, the estimated cost of which is £12,600. Nine of these are road schemes, estimated to cost £1,000 each. The areas in which these works are proposed to be carried out take in the whole county and their execution would help to relieve the unemployed population in these centres. There is a drainage scheme estimated to cost £600. Another scheme deals with the diversion of the Liffey by cutting across the horse-shoe bend on the road near Ballymore-Eustace. The estimate for that is £3,000. I do not know that that is a very pressing work or that it could be gone on with at this season of the year, but as far as road-work is concerned that could be undertaken at once. I might mention that we have 1,000 tons of stones lying on the side of one length of road, but we cannot get them rolled as we have no funds. I hope that when these schemes are put up to the Roads Department that they will deal with them favourably. The Minister in bringing forward this Vote of £300,000 was well aware that it was only a sop. I would ask him to consider the question of bringing forward another Vote in the month of February. If steps are taken at once to deal with the present Vote, the amount of money in question will, I can assure the Minister, be expended before February as far as Kildare is concerned. On previous occasions we got money under these grants, and we got through the work that we undertook in a satisfactory way. The work was carried out without any slackness under the direction of our capable county surveyor. We promise to give a good return for the money we get under the present grant and to expend it as quickly as possible.

Minister for Local Government and Public Health (General Mulcahy)

Deputy O'Kelly says he has very good proof that the reason for this Vote being introduced is that inside of the next six months there is going to be a general election. The proof that he gives is that he does not see any great difference between the distress this year and the year before when there was no Vote. For people of a suspicious mind, the Deputy certainly has very full grounds upon which to base such a statement, because the fact is that there is very little difference in the amount of distress, or the amount of unemployment, this year as compared with last year or the year before.

The question of home assistance has been touched upon. Looking at that question through the different counties with a view to seeing whether, under the eyes of the local authorities charged with the responsibility for relieving distress, there is an amount of distress that would warrant more action on their, part this year than last year, we find if we take the amount of assistance given to able-bodied, or the number of cases of able-bodied dealt with in different parts of the country and exempt the counties of Meath, Kildare, Wicklow, Wexford and Clare, that there is no material difference between the circumstances of this year and last year in the matter of assistance to the able-bodied.

I have the actual amounts only in the case of Meath and Wexford, where there have been increases. In Wexford there has been an increase from £49 to £67; in Meath, from £38 to £62. On the home assistance side, as far as figures go, and as far as reports of home assistance officers and the superintendents of home assistance officers go—and there are 312 covering the whole country, who report monthly on economic conditions—there is not a distressed position shown that is different from last year. If this Vote is introduced this year, it is because of the circumstances of the harvest, and of outside countries that may have a bearing on our condition here during the winter, suggesting potentialities of distress within the coming months that are greater than the distress that existed during the winter of last year.

A question has been raised as to how the Vote will be allocated. As far as the allocation of the Vote goes the Land Commission and the Department of Local Government will be the two principal disbursing bodies. The amounts have to be decided in the light of further examination of the position of distress, as shown in the urban and rural districts. The Minister for Finance will have something to say to the Land Commission and to the Department of Local Government on that. So far as the latter Department is concerned, the expenditure of the money will have some relation to the condition of unemployment existing in a particular place. The fact that a sewerage scheme or a waterworks scheme in any particular area has been held up, because people were dissatisfied to spend money on it, will not necessarily be a case for giving a grant out of the Relief Fund, in order to get the work done now, except there is unemployment in the area that would warrant the giving of the additional grant there. I sympathise with Deputies who raised the point that further powers are necessary in the Department of Local Government in order to deal with these matters, and I also sympathise with those people who have difficulties with regard to the area of charge. One county spreads the area of charge for these things over the whole county.

I have been giving consideration to the matter, and I propose to put before the House within the next few weeks, so that, if possible, we can make use of it in certain counties in connection with work done and assisted by this relief scheme, legislation that will enable the County Council to strike a small rate, say, not more than one penny in the £, for the purpose of guaranteeing a small lump sum to a local body as a contribution to the cost of a water scheme. At present we have either to put the charge on the townland, dispensary district, or the rural district. Very many people know that when a charge is laid on a dispensary district it is often a very heavy charge, maybe 2/- or 2/6 in the £, and may fall on the rural part of the dispensary district, which benefits only in a very remote way from the work carried out. It benefits more than the rest of the county, but certainly not as much as the urban district for which the work is carried out. I think it should be possible that a small charge would be put on the county at large at the desire of the local body, and a small charge on the dispensary district, while the main burden would fall on the urban authority itself. I mention that in reply to some suggestions that were made here.

Which is a national problem.

General Mulcahy

If the Deputy wants to make a point that the country can afford more of this expenditure he probably is quite right, but the Deputy knows that there is an outcry against the figures at which rates are at the present moment. Each county supports a rate of its own, different on land and on other hereditaments. I simply want to point out that there are very big sums of money—they have been increasing from year to year—being spent on employment locally and that generally this Vote is introduced, not because there is a more serious relief position at the present moment than there was last year or the year before, but because the tendency is towards more distress later on in the winter than there was last year or the year before.

Mr. P. Hogan (Clare)

The Executive Council invariably faces this problem of unemployment through the Minister for Industry and Commerce. We find them invariably dealing with this matter in a certain fashion. To paraphrase him very generally, the Minister says the estimates put forward by the members of the Labour Party and the other Party who object to his calculations are exaggerated and incorrect. When we suggest that there are scores of thousands unemployed, living in wretched poverty, ill clad, ill fed, badly housed and with insufficient warmth because of want of employment, he refuses to believe it. He says: "Because I have no means of knowing it, it does not exist," and it is on that basis of logic he proceeds to examine the position. You can prove anything on that basis of logic, "because I do not know it, it does not exist."

We have brought forward here every year to us the bogey of the live register. We have been told about it that it is the one serious record that the Government can produce to show the length, breadth and height of unemployment in the country. He asks us seriously to believe that the numbers of unemployed, according to his own definition of unemployment, are set out in that live register, and he describes unemployed people as people capable of working, willing to work, available for work, genuinely seeking work and unable to get work. There is a good deal of "work" in that definition, and if the Minister was as well able to work work into his schemes as he is into his speeches, we probably would be able to go a good deal further. If we proceed with his logic we probably will destroy the live register. He says, "I do not know of any unemployment other than is on the live register." If we do away with the live register we do away with unemployment. He asked why did not the unemployed write to him, and tell him that they are unemployed. "Why do not they get an envelope and write to me and tell me they want work?" I do not want to suggest to the unemployed that they ought to write to the Department and make their case fully felt, but I do suggest to the Minister for Industry and Commerce that there is very little use in writing to the Department of Industry and Commerce and getting your name registered in the live register so as to be totted up and trotted out as the number of unemployed. If that is the only reason why they should write, then the Minister has very little reason to ask them to write. But I do suggest to the unemployed that they ought to write to the Minister, not so as to get a live register, but that they might help to get a live Minister to attack the problem of unemployment. Despite all that has been said by way of argument, he says that 20,000 represents the volume of unemployed in insurable occupations. That is what the Minister for Industry and Commerce says is the number of unemployed in insurable occupations, and the President tells us that the position of the country is so serious that it is proposed to have a sum of £300,000 for relief of unemployment, and that a considerable portion of this will be utilised in providing employment in rural areas. That is to say, outside the 20,000 that the Minister for Industry and Commerce is aware of, there are thousands in the rural areas that the Minister for Industry and Commerce knows nothing about. There are in the rural areas, according to the President himself, thousands of people who are in need of employment, and that the Minister for Industry and Commerce has no cognisance of. I am prepared to give the Minister for Industry and Commerce credit for trying to get a full register of the number of unemployed, but I am not willing to give him credit for facing the problem of unemployment when himself and the President make two different statements. Even if we do take 20,000 that the Minister for Industry and Commerce represents as unemployed, it gives something like ten weeks work at 30s. a week to the number of unemployed. There is no need of asking me how many men. You can work it out for yourself from the number of unemployed and the money proposed to be spent.

If you take the President's figures and add them to the Minister's figures you have something like a month's or five weeks' employment for the people who are unemployed in rural and urban Ireland, at 30s. a week. Does anybody suggest that is any attempt or any gesture towards the cure of unemployment? I did not think it was possible for us to come down to the discussion of local matters on this Vote, though it has been done and allowed to pass; but I think that we might reason from what we are intimately acquainted with to the general position in the country. In my own constituency—I do not like trotting out this matter, as I am sure the people whom I represent would not like to have it trotted out, but it is necessary to make the position clear—in the half-year ended March, 1930, there was expended £6,187 in home assistance Two thousand six hundred and thirty-two people had to be assisted, and yet we are told there is no serious unemployment in that constituency. I suppose the Minister for Industry and Commerce would tell me that because he does not know of these people, of their general wretchedness, hunger and deprivation, that they do not exist.

The Minister for Industry and Commerce, or some other Minister, will, no doubt, twit us with not putting forward some tangible proposition for the relief of unemployment. There is in existence our recent solution for the problem of unemployment. There is in existence a proposition that we are prepared to stand over for the relief of unemployment, and the solution of the other problems that this country is faced with. We can probably make the Minister for Finance a Christmas present of a copy. Putting the matter generally, does not the Executive Council know of the wretched housing conditions in the urban district? Does it not know of the wretched conditions in towns and villages throughout rural Ireland, that in towns and villages that are not urbanised there are lanes of houses, the proper cure for which would be to burn them because they are a disgrace to anything calling itself civilisation? There is nothing like proper conditions, no separation of the sexes, so that the rearing of children can be carried on decently within the walls of these wretched houses. We are asked what is our remedy for that. Why is there not a general national scheme for the construction of these houses? Why is there not legislation to give somebody power to start these schemes? Why is there not provision for the extension of loans for the preparation of these schemes? Surely the Minister knows all these things. He knows of the sanitary conditions that prevail in some of the towns and villages in rural Ireland outside the urbanised towns, and he knows that a general scheme ought to be prepared in order to tackle these things that are beds of disease. The wonder is that they have not started more disease already throughout the length and breadth of the country.

[An Ceann Comhairle resumed the Chair.

That brings one to the point that the urban districts must certainly be looked after just as well as the rural. The extent of unemployment in urban districts is serious, just as unemployment in the rural districts is serious. What was done in previous years ought certainly not to be done again. I have in mind one thing where in a wide area the people had to travel eight or nine miles to go to a town where large fairs are held. A certain Department undertook the making of a road that would take about four or five miles off the distance the people had to travel. A grant was given, the road was made halfway and then left there. It is no use to anybody. I think it was started for the purpose of giving work and to provide facilities for the people in that area.

I am not satisfied that £300,000 is going to do much. It is merely a vote on account if you like. The Government ought to bring forward some means by which employment can be given to men permanently and not in this piece-meal and dole-ful fashion.

Mr. Kennedy

In connection with this Vote I want to protest against the statement made by Deputy Shaw in this House on 19th November, in which he said: "I hope that any of it that is given by way of providing employment will be spent on drainage schemes. A considerable amount of money has been spent on the roads and not enough in my opinion on drainage." It is most unfair that Deputy Shaw or any other Deputy should specify one particular way in which any portion of this Vote that may find its way to a particular county should be spent.

Deputy Shaw may have a drainage scheme of his own in his own locality, but that is no reason why he should ear-mark whatever portion of the money that goes to Westmeath for that particular scheme. He may have roads as smooth as glass passing through Mullingar, but I think the Minister for Local Government has been made aware that it would practically take £150,000, or half of this Vote, to put the main roads in Westmeath into order. We have numerous main roads from Mullingar to Cavan and to other towns which are in a scandalous state of repair. While I do not say that the money should be spent on any particular road, I do say that it is most unfair on the part of any Government Deputy to say that no money should be spent on anything but drainage. I hope that the County Westmeath will get more generous treatment than it did on the occasion of the last Vote. On that occasion Westmeath got £1,000, whilst other counties got from £10,000 to £20,000. As a condition of the getting of that £1,000, Westmeath was told the County Council would have to borrow £2,000. That Council already had an overdraft of £40,000. It has one of the highest rates in the Saorstát. To keep down that overdraft and to meet interest charges on the various loans is a big task for that Council, and it should not be told that a condition of getting this grant would be that it would have to borrow further.

The Ministry, in giving the grant, should take into account the finances of the county. They should also take into account the main roads and the interest and redemption charges on the loans every year. I do hope the Minister will be more generous in his allocation to Westmeath this year. I hope when the grant is given out that there will be no undue delay about it, and that whatever benefits accrue from it will accrue in the hardest months of the year—December and January. The Minister referred to the question of home assistance. I have repeatedly got from his Department figures for home assistance administered in the various counties during the years since the Saorstát was first set up. I will deal with my own county in particular. The amount spent there in home assistance in 1922-3 was £4,500. The amount spent this year, or rather the amount that we estimated for, was £11,300. That will probably be exceeded by £2,000. The Minister is wrong in saying, at all events as regards our county, that we are more generous in the giving of home assistance. We would like to give more, but we have not enough to go round. I question the Minister's figures about the 33 able-bodied persons getting relief in Meath and 100 somewhere else. In my own locality there are more than 100 able-bodied men needing relief. I would like to know how the Minister got these figures. Very often it is not the able-bodied person that comes to the relieving officer. It is his wife. I am convinced that these figures as to able-bodied assistance are incorrect. My own experience tells me that. I question the Minister's statement that the large increase in home help is due to more generous treatment by boards of health.

The Minister gave some figures about capital due on the loans during the various periods for the relief of unemployment. As regards housing and so on, he also gave us figures as to sums due on loans raised for these items. He said that a sum of £200,000 was raised in 1914, and £300,000 in 1915. He then gave us the total indebtedness as being in the vicinity of £16,000,000. I would like to know from the Minister what was the total indebtedness in regard to these local loans when the Free State Government took over affairs in 1922. He did not enlighten us on that matter. I do not think the capital expenditure since the Saorstát was set up was anything like the capital expenditure raised in the previous years. The loans raised before the coming of the Saorstát were raised on much more advantageous terms than the loans now being raised. This is a very serious matter in connection with housing. The general rate of interest for loans under the Labourers Acts ranges from 2¼ per cent. to 2¾ per cent. Such advantageous terms are not being got now, and it is up to the Minister to get the same terms as his predecessors got for the purpose of solving the housing problem and giving employment.

Deputy Hogan referred to housing conditions. I believe you could cut down the expenditure on tuberculosis treatment to one quarter if you dealt with the housing question. How people live in hovels in the rural as well as the urban areas is a mystery. How they are not annihilated by disease, diphtheria and tuberculosis, in far greater numbers than they are is a great tribute to the sturdiness of the Irish race. You could cut down the expenditure on tuberculosis and other less malignant diseases that fill the county hospitals every winter if you dealt with the housing problem. Incidentally you would be solving the unemployment problem. The matter of sanitation has been spoken about. As long as the present Ministry are in office the sanitary conditions of Irish towns will never be dealt with. They will remain as they got them.

When this money is being distributed it should be distributed in an equitable way. It should not be ear-marked for any particular district, but should be spent in the areas where the greatest unemployment lies. Unemployment is rampant all round, in the rural as well as the urban areas. The first consideration in the allocation of the money should not be the utility of the schemes but rather the amount of relief given to human beings.

Mr. Little

The trouble about this condition, which the President has described as temporary, is that the first one hundred years of it are the worst. As a matter of fact this condition is endemic and these temporary remedied merely tide the Government over their political situation, do a certain amount of good, but do not remedy the situation in a fundamental way. One has only to cast one's eye over the periods since 1924 to see that almost every year there has been a vote for relief schemes. The total amount voted for that period has been something like £847,000. It is true, as the Minister for Finance pointed out, that all the money voted was not expended. I make out that about £633,000 has been expended. In the year 1927-28, of the £150,000 voted slightly less than £50,000 was not expended. In the year 1924-25 of the £500,000 voted £164,000 was not expended. That makes a total of £214,000 unexpended. That taken from the total amount voted shows that £633,000 has been expended in that period on relief schemes.

All these schemes are necessary because the Government has the wrong point of view. It has been dependent in its attitude of mind upon the British point of view. It has done nothing to protect Ireland against the great syndicates which exploit this country, which sell their goods here and against which individual enterprise has no chance. It is the duty of the Government in a small country to give such a form of protection—I do not speak in terms of tariffs generally —in the safeguarding and watching over of small industries that we will not be like a naked man amid armed men as regards the development of our industries; that we will not be in the position of people unarmed against these powerful corporations. Further than that, the Government has never been able to get away from what is called the laissez faire school of economics. Because of that view-point there are countless schemes for the development of industries which have been dried, cured and hung up in the Department of Industry and Commerce because the Government do not consider it is their duty to do anything to foster these industries. They have never made any attempt to approach the banks to see whether they would advance money to support those industries. There is no policy in that direction. They are entirely dominated by influences and interests which are outside this country and so it is that from year to year the taxpayer has to pay for the worst results because of their lack of a proper policy.

The figures of unemployment do not altogether indicate the low condition of the vitality of the people. In Waterford City recently I discovered that many school children are really not able to do their work because they are ill-fed. Their parents are not able to feed them properly, so that they are not able to learn their lessons. I was told by one who knows it, that it is killing the teachers trying to teach children of that sort. That is a very good indication of the low economic vitality of the people. It is due to the fact that their wages are low, that they are employed at casual labour, and so on. That is not what one would have anticipated and would expect in this country which it is so often boasted is an infant State which is growing strong, and should be prospering in industry. It is certainly not the result which Arthur Griffith looked forward to when this State was established. One would have anticipated at least the development of industries, and that this condition of low vitality would have been removed by the growth of these industries. One of the reasons usually quoted as an excuse for the present conditions is that they are world conditions. That phrase "world conditions" is absolute cant. There is a country which has suffered just as bad weather and which is largely an agricultural country, but also industrial. Because its industries are well-balanced and because it has a national policy of finance which will not allow interference from outside, instead of at present having a large amount of unemployment that country is looking, or was two or three months ago looking, for 20,000 workers to do work. I refer to France, a country which is never referred to by those who speak about world conditions of depression.

It is at this balance between industry and agriculture that the Government should have aimed, but it has not done so. I need not labour that point as it has been dealt with before. I should, however, like to point out that some years ago an appeal was made from this side of the House for some united action; that some effort should be made by all parties, that an economic council should be set up. That economic council was not set up; no attempt was made to establish a neutral body which could look to the economic interests of the country and to them alone. Now the opportunity for such a thing is gone, and we can only hope that in the near future the Government which refused to establish that will be swept out of office, and give place to another Government which will come with fresh ideas to supplant that which is now the hoariest Government in Europe, because the Cumann na nGaedheal administration happens to be the oldest one in Europe.

I think that a suggestion which was made before and turned down by the Government is worthy of repetition and would not cost very much money. The suggestion was that a small amount of money should be devoted to the advertisement of Irish industries, and be used in some way to bring before the eyes of the Irish people the industries which are in existence. If that were done it might absorb a certain number of the unemployed in productive industries. An effort of this sort was made by the business men of Waterford and, although they had very little means, it was done with some small result and it gave some sort of fillip to local industries. I suggest that a small portion of this money should be devoted to something of that kind. If it were only by way of experiment I believe it would justify itself in results.

The Minister for Local Government referred to prospects being bad, and said that that was the reason this grant is made. Prospects undoubtedly are very bad. We are drifting into a position which could hardly be very much worse. Calculating very roughly from the figures mentioned by Deputy de Valera, we must have lost in purchasing power since 1923 at least £130,000,000, which has flowed out of this country in respect of the unfavourable trade balance, of the annuities gone out of the country for which we get no return, and of emigration. There is depression in America which is going to reduce enormously the amount of money which comes to this country every year and upon which some districts, including some districts in the County Waterford, depend almost entirely. There is depression in English industries, which is going to have tremendous reactions here. People with money to invest invested it in English industries and were backed up by the Irish banks. Now they are just hanging on in the desperate hope that these industries will come back again. Depression in that respect is going to effect all the people employed by these persons here. There is going to be a general reduction in the standard of living of those who are usually referred to as the better classes. I refer to those who have some money invested and are not merely living upon earnings. The people that they employ are going to be thrown out of employment. Then we have the reduction of farm stock, which is a reduction in essential capital. Farmers are crying out for relief. We have all received to-day a resolution from an association of farmers claiming relief in respect of overhead charges—rates, annuities, etc. They complain, and I have heard the complaint made publicly, that the sheriffs and bailiffs are seizing their goods and selling them at a rate which is totally out of proportion to their value. In some cases the most outrageous things are being done by the bailiffs. These things are all going to produce results in the near future. Is £300,000 going to meet all the difficulties of that situation?

There is a great deal to be said for the contention that this £300,000 is voted in the same spirit in which, long ago in the old Dublin Corporation, money used to be voted for the purpose of repairing roads just before an election in order to capture votes—a kind of political souperism. It is demoralising to have recourse to doles of this sort; demoralising from the political point of view and from the general economic point of view. The Minister for Finance compared the year 1924-5 with the present year. He said that this year we have not had to have as large a Vote as in 1924-5. In that year the amount voted was £500,000, of which only £336,000 was spent. At that time there were in the country at least 100,000 people who since then have emigrated, and it is with the smaller population that the Minister has now to deal, so that the comparison is vitiated by the worst element of impoverishment that occurred since.

[An Leas-Cheann Comhairle took the Chair.]

Complaint has been made on several occasions in this House that distinction is drawn between different citizens in the country when it comes to giving out this work. In road work in Waterford on certain Government schemes ex-soldiers were always given the preference. That creates a most unhealthy condition in the minds of the people. It perpetuates the war feeling and makes people feel that the Government are still carrying on a kind of economic civil war in the country. It creates a morbid state of mind and it makes them almost incalculable as to what people may do in certain circumstances. Now I would urge very strongly upon the Government that they should remove all distinction in the administration of these grants and the administration of the Road Fund; that they should administer it indifferently and without any distinction as to different politics. We have had recently an example of an attempt made through the police to find out how many of a certain political colour were being employed in the Electricity Supply Board, so that we had evidence from that that the Government were still going on with this foolish policy of creating bad blood in the country. Although we are obliged to vote for this grant because there is no way out of it—it is a matter of sheer, absolute necessity, to tide the people over the coming period—at the same time, one does feel it is not getting us away from drifting towards poverty. Some one in the House referred to the South Sea Islanders who live by taking in each other's washing. We will be reduced to the position of doing nothing else except taking in each other's washing, and that washing is shrinking to such an extent and is getting into such a state of rags that soon very little of it will be left.

Seosamh O Mongáin

Daoine do bheadh ag éisteacht leis an dream ar an dtaoibh eile den Teach, ceapfadh siad nach ndearna aon duine ariamh ar an taoibh seo den Teach aon bhlas ar son na ndaoine mbochta. Céard a rinne siad-san? Tá a fhios ag an tír go léir é. Dubhairt an Teachta Seán T. O Ceallaigh go raibh an tUachtarán ag innsint bréag faoi dhonacht na tíre acht isé mo bharamhail go mbeadh bród air-sean agus ar na Teachtaí atá ar aon taoibh leis dá mbeadh an tír seacht n-uaire níos measa, agus dá mb'fhéidir an t-Uachtarán agus a mhuinntir féin do chur faoi chois. Tá a fhios againn go bhfuil níos mó grádh Dia i ladhaircín an Uachtaráin ná atá ina dhream féin go léir. Is mór an gar go bhfuil na daoine bochta againn mar meireach na daoine bochta ní bheadh tada le rádh ag an dream taoibh thall.

Tá bród orm-sa gur thug an tAire Airgid an vóta seo isteach. Déanfaidh se maith an domhain do na daoine go léir. Bóithre chuig na portaígh agus chuig na cladaigh do dheisiú, stadanna beaga le haghaidh na mbád do dhéanamh—ar a leithéid seo d'oibreacha do caitheadh an t-airgead a tugadh amach cúpla blian o shoin. Rinne sé maith an domhain mar is mó duine gur bhain sé an cliabh dá dhruim agus codhladh na hoíche do dhaoine eile nuair a bhí fhios aca go raibh a mbád sábhálta insna stadanna do rinneadh. Níl a fhios agam airgead ar bith do caitheadh le mo chuimhne go ndearna na daoine an oiread ar a shon, mar bhí a a fhios aca go maith ar ar mhaithe leo féin é Im' bharamhail-se ba cheart a leithéid seo do dhéanamh gach aon Gheimhreadh, mar is as rudaí beaga mar seo a thaghas 'chuile mhaith agus ní as rudaí móra go gcloisimíd gleo mór fútha agus gan tada dá bharr. Tá a fhios ag na daoine le n-a ndéanamh agus tá fonn ortha iad do dhéanamh. Ba mhaith liom-sa dá bhfuigheadh Aire an Iascaigh cuid den airgead seo mar tá go leor oileain sa tír go ndéanfadh stadanna beaga go leor maitheasa dóibh agus do chuirfeadh sé na daoine go mór chun cinn ag déanamh na ceilpe agus ag cruinniú na cairrigíné atá fá dheire ar a chosaibh.

Mr. Henry Broderick

I welcome this Vote of £300,000, but my opinion is that the amount will be inadequate to meet the demands of the unemployed at the moment. We have been told that the number of the unemployed is not as high this year as last. I asked a question hero last week as to the numbers of the unemployed registered at the labour exchanges in the counties of Longford and Westmeath. The answer I got was that in the county of Longford there were 59 persons unemployed. I wonder what Deputy Connolly will think of that. In the County Westmeath I was told there were 570 unemployed. I have been through that constituency lately, as other Deputies have been, and I can assure the House that unemployment in the constituency I represent is very rife, particularly in the large towns. I am sorry to inform the House that the woollen industry in Athlone is not doing as well as we would expect. The cause of that is the increased tariff which has been imposed by the United States Government upon the products of that mill. This will have a reaction on numbers of other people who are dependent on workers in the mill. Yet we are told that there are no able-bodied people receiving home help assistance in the County Westmeath or only a small number. That is not true, at any rate, of the towns I visited. Longford is in an appalling state through unemployment, yet I am told there are only 59 unemployed in the whole county. The town of Ballymahon is in a worse plight, with bad housing accommodation, no employment, no street lighting, no sanitation of any kind, and no waterworks. All the towns round about are similarly situated. I did not hear the Minister moving this Vote and I do not know what class of work this money is to be allocated for. The roads, as far as I know, in the County Longford are certainly not a credit to the county council. The roads in Westmeath are better but they deserve more attention, and this grant will be welcome to the road workers in Westmeath.

There is one class of road to which I would like to call attention, and these are the roads which are called cul-de-sac. They are of public utility, but they do not come within the meaning of the Act. Such a road leads to a particular place and ends there, and hence we are prohibited from making these roads. There are also a number of bog roads that should have something done for them by the Land Commission. Waterworks and sewerage schemes are very necessary, but we are told that it is only where schemes are already prepared that anything can be done under this Vote. I hope the Minister will give this matter attention, and see that something is done for the making of such roads as I have mentioned. Drainage is very necessary, and should be carried out in Westmeath and Longford. I hope the Minister will let us know what schemes of work should be prepared to receive attention, so that the work could be put in force before Christmas.

Mr. Mullins

The Minister for Finance, in introducing this Estimate, said that the sum was adequate and ample to deal with the distress which he believed existed. I do not think there is a Deputy in this House would agree, no matter to what Party he belonged, that the sum is either ample or adequate to deal with even a fraction of the unemployment and distress as they exist and affect the smallest farmers and the unemployed workers in the towns. Last week, we had a debate on the economic position in the Twenty-six Counties, and a Deputy informed the House that in every part of the country distress existed to an extent that, despite the President's juggling with figures, could not be gainsaid.

To-night, in introducing this Supplementary Vote, the Minister for Finance gave a pretty artistic exhibition of what juggling with figures can do in throwing out a smoke-screen calculated to deceive Deputies into the relief that this unemployment question is being tackled to the extent of £2,000,000. There is very little use in the House setting itself down to take a serious view of this important question if it does not face the facts as they exist, and if there is not an effort irrespective of Party propaganda or political kudos to tackle the problem as a serious issue and not one on which debating points might be scored by one section of the House or another.

It is well also, when dealing with a problem of this nature and when considering a Supplementary Vote of £300,000, that the House should go back over the years and take stock, if I may so call it, of the position that we were promised in 1921 and that which exists to-day. Fiscal automony was going to secure an absolute Utopia in this country. We were supposed to have obtained freedom to achieve freedom, but we find, eight years afterwards, that it is freedom to starve for a large section of the population. The contrast between the activities of this State and its Ministers, on the one hand, and the mass of unemployed citizens in the towns and of the small farmers whom the bailiff has hit hard, on the other hand, is one that will not be met by the provision of an inadequate sum of £300,000. We have developed in the Twenty-six Counties into the dumping ground for the whole world. We have in our unemployment and emigration a national menace of paramount importance. No less an authority than Father Cahill, whose book, "Ireland's Peril," would be an interesting volume for the Minister if he took it home and studied it, states: "The central social evil in Ireland in reference to which almost every public evil must be considered.... Nothing so well illustrates the deplorable condition to which this misgovernment and social injustice have reduced the nation."

Has the Cabinet during the Recess done anything to frame a policy to meet the spectre of unemployment? After five months' adjournment Deputies were entitled to expect, when the Ministry met the Dáil after such a long holiday, that some policy would have been evolved to tackle the question, not on the lines of super-doles or attempts to make the ordinary unemployed citizen feel that he was getting something for nothing, and make him more demoralised and degraded, but on the lines of some reproductive scheme. What, however, do we find? We find that year after year, winter after winter, the only solution put forward by the Executive Council is based on the idea of "live horse and you will got grass," and "here is a few weeks' work to keep you quiet for Christmas; get ahead and something will happen." If the Executive Council cannot produce a better solution than that of a provision of constantly recurring Votes of £300,000 or £100,000 for the relief of unemployment, then it is time that some other body of men took the job in hand. Surely that is not a proper way to tackle the problem. Surely for eight years, with all the resources of the State at their disposal, with the assistance of the officials, and with all the brains of this young Ministry about which we hear so much, some national programme should have been put before the Dáil when it reassembled last week. We find, however, that there is no such programme in the President's statement to deal with the problem, but that the usual promises have been made that the various Departments will spend money on road schemes and so forth. Our experience of three years in this House has led us to believe that by the time these schemes mature there will be a lot of people wondering why the Dáil wasted so much time in talking about unemployment and distress, and will be wondering where that £300,000 has disappeared to.

We find the great contrast of which I spoke existing in this State. While on the one hand we have receptions by the dozen, magnificent representations and establishments in all the capitals of the world, ambassadors in every country, while we have money to enable jumping teams to be sent to foreign countries, while we are represented at the League of Nations, while the boom in stocks and shares is treated by the President as a magnificent proof of our prosperity, and while he states that the unemployment figures have been reduced by 50 per cent.—while we hear all that, we know that in reality the situation was never so bad. Anyone who has any experience of the country knows that no amount of juggling with figures and no amount of rosy promises in regard to road schemes and so forth will get over the fact that this winter, according to no less authority than the "Cork Examiner," is going to prove a very hard time for our people and that this £300,000 will be by no means adequate. It is only equal to about £10,000 for each county and is not equal to the starting of even one big road scheme. Surely, as Deputy de Valera said, if the Government took this question seriously and if they agreed with the doctrine that it is the duty of the State to provide work they would tackle it on a national scale. They have not done so.

With this £300,000 and the £2,000,000 promised to be spent by the various Departments there ought to be a constructive programme in regard to housing and public health schemes. The Government should embark on big schemes and make them a basis to go on with. Instead of that, however, they are only tinkering with the problem and this money will be thrown. away in many cases. While I welcome this sum of £300,000 as being better than nothing and while I am prepared to vote for it, I want some guarantee from the Minister that while these schemes are maturing and while the red-tape regulations are being got over the people will not be allowed to starve. We know that three years ago when the last grant was made there was so much red tape to be got over, so many letters to be written to the Departments, especially the Local Government Department, that by the time sanction was obtained for such schemes, Christmas had gone and we were well into March. I hope that we will get over that this time, that the Minister will scrap all this red tape and adopt such a slogan in connection with the sum of £300,000 as "winter rations for the unemployed," and give them money rather than keep them tossing about from day to day in the hope that the schemes will materialise and then find out that they have not materialised until it is too late.

We have the other problem to consider—namely, that there should be no discrimination in the allocation of work under these grants. A few days ago I asked the Minister for Justice whether it was a fact that a circular was issued from the Commissioner's Office of the Gárda Síochána asking for particulars about members of the I.R.A. who got employment under the Electricity Supply Board. The Minister admitted that the circular was issued, and said that he thought that it was quite right to issue it. In other words, the Minister considered that the policy of his Department in relation to certain people should be to ostracise them, to prevent them getting employment, to force them to take the emigrant ship, to get out or starve. If this grant is to be allocated on national lines to relieve unemployment there must be no discrimination, and men of all armies—British, Free State and Republican—should be entitled to work. There is no reason why all these men should not be given an opportunity of earning money to tide them over the winter months. I hope that when the money is allocated no discrimination will be made, and that there will be no penalisation of any section of the community because of any political opinions which they may hold. The "Star" says that we can have no economy except at the expense of our social services. Ministers state that this Vote is adequate to deal with distress. I think that the sooner the Dáil gets down to facts and realises that the voting of these recurrent grants is really useless, and is only tinkering with the problem, the better it will be for the House, the country and the unemployed.

When I speak of the unemployed, I mean not only unemployed citizens in the towns, but also the small farmers and fishermen. These three classes must receive attention if the State is to exist. Just as a greater man than any Minister said that we were the backbone of the country, so, too, if the Ministry allows our peasantry to be extinguished—allows the bone and sinew of the towns to emigrate, and at the same time claims that this is a happy and prosperous country, no amount of camouflage can hide the facts, and no amount of hypocrisy will get away from the guilt of those responsible. I am not going to suggest schemes to be adopted in West Cork, because the various departments are well acquainted with the needs of the district. Such schemes have been put before them on various occasions, but very little has been done to meet the needs of the district. Certain schemes of which the Minister spoke, such as work on the main road to Cork, and other roads of West Cork, could be got under way. I hope that the Department of Local Government will change its mind in regard to the steam-rolling of the road from Cork to Kinsale, and in regard to the water supply in the Irish-speaking district of Ballingeary schemes which I suggested, and which were turned down by the Minister six months ago.

There is no doubt that schemes in the nature of building schemes could be started by the Government giving grants and loans. An effort could be made to give housing loans which would be utilised for the double purpose of providing houses and giving employment. If this money is doled out in small schemes, no reproductive return may be expected, and the object for which the grant has been given may not be attained. I think that the Minister should consider these points very carefully, and take the lesson that other countries have learned. He should learn the lesson that whilst the people for a time may exist on national sentiment, and whilst the people for the moment may be carried ahead on a wave of enthusiasm hoping to achieve a certain political object, as in other countries, that wave may subside, and if something is not done that spiritual feeling will die very quickly, and will give way to a greater feeling, a greater call, the call of the stomach, the call for bread. If this country is allowed to develop on the lines along which some other countries have developed, and if we have the refusal of a responsible Executive to deal with the situation and to examine the problem caused by a world-wide depression, not on the lines of doles or soup, there may come a greater urge, and a greater power outside the Dáil may deal with Ministers and the Dáil, and settle these questions of unemployment once and for all.

Proinnsias O Fathaigh

Dubhairt an Teachta O Mongain, tamall o shoin, gur mhaith an rud go raibh na daoine bochta ann mar adhbhar cainnte do na Teachtaí agus dubhairt sé freisin gur mhór an náire é a bheith ag caitheamh droch-mheasa ar an Uachtarán. Dubhairt an tUachtarán, seachtain o shoin, go raibh staid na tíre níos fearr na a bhí bliain o shoin. Agus conus mar tá an sgéal againn? I Mí Iuil, 1929, bhí 17,126 daoine cláruighthe mar dhaoine diomhaoine. I Meitheamh, 1930, bhí 18,945 daoine cláruighthe agus i Mí na Samhna, 1930, bhí 22,990 cláruighthe. As an méid sin daoine a bhí díomhaoine i Meitheamh, 1930, bhí 53 per cent. ag bainnt tairbhe as an Arachás Díomhaointís agus i na Samhna, 1930, ní raibh ach 50 per cent. ag bainnt tairbhe as. Do réir na bhfigúirí seo agus na bhfigúirí a thug An Teachta Seán T.O Ceallaigh tamall o shoin, níl an tír chó saidhbhir séanmhar agus a dubhairt an tUachtarán.

Dá mbeadh polasaí ceart economiceach ag Rialtas an Stáit seo, ní bheadh gábhadh leis an ndeontas so chun cabhruighthe le lucht an ghábhtair. Ós rud é, ámh, go bhfuil an gábhtar ann, is maith an rud an t-airgead fhágháil mar sheift sealadach. Tá súil againn nach mbainfear úsáid as an ndeontas agus é dá roinnt, chun aon dream polaitíochta do chur chun cinn. Is deachair an t-airgead a roinnt go cothrom ar mhuinntir na mbailtí móra agus ar mhuinntir na tuatha. Tá a fhíos ag an saoghal, agus admhuightar ag an Rialtas féin é, go bhfuil na feilméirí i gcruadh-chás i mbliana. Ar an dtaoibh eile, tá rúin factha ag Teachtaí Co. na Gaillimhe dá chur in úil dúinn go bhfuil na ceudta duine scurtha diamhaoin i Gaillimh, i mBeul Áthá na Sluagh, i nGort Inse Guaire agus in áiteanna nach iad, ón Chlochán go dtí Beul Atha na Sluagh agus ón Dún Mór go dtí Gort Inse Guaire. Tá bailtí móra in a bhfuil seantighe lobhtha agus fothracha gránna salacha leis na bliadhantha anuas agus ba bhréagh an rud é iad a ghlanadh ar son aoibhneasa na mbailtí féin agus ar son sláinte an phobail. Níl d'acmhuinn ná de mhaoin ag na comhairlí puiblí an deagh-obair sin a dheunamh acht is é mo bharamhail go dtabharfaidís fén obair dá mbeadh a leath den chostas ar fághail ón Rialtas.

Rud eile dhe, tá bailtí móra agus bailtí beaga i gCo. na Gaillimhe agus soláthar fíor uisce glan de dhíth orra, go bhfuil ar na daoine uisce go bhfuil síol aicide innte d'ól. Tá a fhios san ag Roinn an Rialtais Áitiúla, óir is minic a rinneadh tagairt don scéal i dtuarasgabháil na ndochtúirí. Maidir le camraí agus gleus camraighe, tá bailtí móra sa chonndae céana agus ní thig liom a rádh go bhfuil aon phlean glantóireachta acu cor ar bith. Táid chomh dona san go mbíonn an drochbholadh le móthú ionnta le linn an bhrothaill. Nuair a deuntar iarracht ar an galair sin a leigheas, bíonn aighneas agus argóint ann ar feadh tamaill, feuchaint cé dhíolfadh as an obair, cé an limistéir ar a dtuitfeadh an costas, cóimhlint idir muinntir an bhaile mhóir agus muinntir na tuatha mórdtimpeall, díospóireacht searbh ag an gComhairle Conndae, agus b'in deire an scéil go ceann cúpla bliain eile. Ba mhór an gar teacht i gcabhair do na bailtí sin. Obair tairbheach iseadh é in a mbeadh buntáiste do'n Stát i ndeire na ndála. B'fhearr go mór míle punt a chaitheamh ar obair den tsord san ná cúpla ceud a roinnt in a dheontas gan tairbhe. Níl a fhios agam an féidir na scoileanna do dheisiú le cuid den airgead seo. Tá cuid acu agus tá siad go dona ar fad. Dá dtiocfadh linn iad do dheisiú agus an costas d'íoc as an deontas so ba mbaith an rud é.

Tá na feilméirí nach bhfuil acht gabháltaisí beaga acu i gcruadhchás i mbliana, de bhárr na doininne. Tá na fataí maith go leor, b'fhéidir, go fóill acht níl fhíos an mbeidh siad go maith san Earrach, toisc gan iad bheith abaidh agus cruadh i mbliana mar ba ghnáthach. D'fheudfaí obair fhághail do chlainn mhac na bhfeilméirí sin tré deis a chur ar na bóithribh. Ní do na bóithribh móra atáim ag tagairt, mar tugtar aire mhaith dóibh sin ar fud na tíre, acht do na bóithribh beaga as a mbaintear úsáidh ag furmhór na bhfeil méirí. Caithtear a oiread san airgid ar na bóithribh móra go ndeintear faillighe ar na mion-bhóithribh agus ar na bealaigh naisc. Is minic lochán orra sa Gheimhreadh. Chonnachas féin sruthán ag rith fan an bhothair, agus uaireannta tuile gan tlás orra ar feadh míosa. Bíonn ar na leanbhaí bochta siubhal thríd an lochán ar dul ar scoil dóibh agus an lá a thabhairt ar scoil agus na cosa fuar fluich i rith an lae. B'fhearrde iad go minic bheith cosnochtaithe. Ba mhaith an rud é na loganna a líonadh pé áit in a bhfuil an bóthar fá chomhtrom an talmhan agus claiseanna a dhéanadh i náiteanna eile le caoi éaluighthe a thabhairt do'n tuile.

Anois an t-am le crainn a chur. Tá fhios againn nach é tuairim Aire na Talmhuidheachta gur áiteanna feileamhnacha gaorthaidh agus seanphortacha agus cliatháin na sléibhthe san iarrthar i gcóir foraoiseachta. Ghéibhtear giumhais ins na háitheacha sin, ámh, nuair a bhíotar ag bainnt móna, agus má bhí crainn giumhaise ann uair, déanfadh an tadhmad ceudna fás ann arís, de réir nádúra. Dar ndóigh, níl an t-adhmad san analuachmhar acht ghníthear úsáid de mar sin féin. B'fhearr liomsa adhmad cruadh a sholáthairt gan amhras agus d'fheudfaí cuid de a chur i noirtear agus i dtuaisceart Condae na Gaillimhe. Is fíor nach mbeidh proifeid le fághail as an bhforaoiseacht go ceann abhfad acht ba chóir do Rialtais Stáit feuchaint rompa agus bheith fadradharcach. Táthar ag deunamh úsáid as tuighe cruitneachta fáiscithte in ionad adhmaid i ndeuntúsaí áirithe fá láthair, acht do réir gach cosamhalachta beidh gádh leis an adhmad mar adhbhar deuntaisí go ndeire an t-saoghail.

Mr. Corish

One would like to feel that the rosy picture painted by the President last week, in describing the conditions that prevail in this country, was a true reflex of the situation. But I think we all know, and the President ought to know, that the contrary is the case. All over the country meetings are being held by farmers and others pointing out to the Government the distress that prevails in their particular areas. It is generally known that it is not at all easy to get farmers to come together to a meeting, and it is only because of the position that prevails that they are coming together now in order to explain their position and to endeavour to get the Government and their representatives generally to do something to relieve them. As if to contradict himself, the President, after painting the picture that he did last week of the alleged good conditions that prevail in the country, proceeded to tell the Dáil that the Government were about to allocate a sum of £300,000 to relieve distress in the country. Now there is either distress in the country or there is not. Those of us who are in touch with the rural areas and the provincial towns know quite well that a great deal of distress prevails at the present time; that from day to day the position is not getting better, but that, in fact, in many parts of the country it is becoming steadily worse. No one here desires to paint a black picture, but it appears to be absolutely necessary to do so in order to get the Government to realise that the country requires something to be done to relieve the distress at present prevailing amongst the people.

I, for one, am not satisfied that the Government, and especially the Department of Industry and Commerce, have given sufficient attention to the matter of safeguarding our industries. I wonder if the Minister for Industry and Commerce insists upon getting returns regularly from our manufacturers. I would like to know whether, when he sees any decrease in the trade of a particular industry, he takes action to secure that any trade that has been lost by an industry is brought back again. In the case of my own constituency, I know that since the war ended in 1918 the agricultural implement-manufacturing firms there have not been doing sufficient to keep their staff employed as they should be.

I think the President will agree that there is not much improvement in the country from the point of view of that particular industry, especially when we find that £80,000 worth of agricultural machinery was imported into this country last year. In this connection, I hope that when people advocate tariffs for the farming population they will take steps to see that a stipulation is made that those farmers will purchase Irish-made machinery for work on their farms. If that were done, then so far as my constituency is concerned, there certainly would not be any need for distress grants. I put it to the Government that that is a matter that should not be lost sight of.

Several Deputies stressed the point with regard to the unemployment register. It has been pointed out here repeatedly that the register compiled by the Department of Industry and Commerce has no relation good, bad or indifferent to the state of affairs that prevails in this country. Apart altogether from the position pointed out by my colleague, Deputy Hogan, who told the House that the register only applied to urban unemployed who happened to be in receipt of benefit at the particular moment when the census was compiled, and from the fact that there are surely as many more rural workers unemployed in regard to whom the Minister has no figures, there are a large number of unemployed in the urban areas who have not been employed during the last three or four years. In consequence of that they do not expect to get any assistance from the labour exchanges and are altogether out of touch with these institutions. Therefore, they are not taken into consideration when the Minister is compiling his figures. I am of the opinion that during the past three or four years the situation in this country has not improved in the way that the President and the Minister for Finance would have us believe that it has.

It is very hard to discuss the Vote before the House by reason of the fact that neither the Minister for Finance nor the Minister for Local Government has told the House how it is proposed that this money should be allocated. On the last occasion that a Vote was passed considerable difficulty was experienced by local authorities and other bodies. They experienced considerable difficulty in endeavouring to find out from the Minister for Finance or his Department what the position was and how these grants were to be secured. Unless the Minister acquaints the House of what the actual position is in so far as the allocation of the money is concerned, the situation will lend itself to procrastination and delay and will not do the unemployed any good, because if the money is to be used for the betterment of the unemployed, then I think everyone will agree it ought to be in circulation before the Christmas holidays.

Certainly the deserving poor, those who want work, who have been endeavouring to find it for a considerable time, and who cannot do so, should be in a position to earn something decent to put them over the Christmas holidays. In my opinion, the Minister for Local Government made some very peculiar statements. He started by seriously objecting to Deputy O'Connell's suggestion that the Government should initiate waterworks and sewerage schemes, inasmuch as that was not their business, but that of the local authorities. To a large extent I agree with him there, as I know of many instances where local authorities neglected to do what was their obvious duty in that respect. Subsequently, however, the Minister, replying to an interjection by Deputy Davin, pointed out that the Department had to be careful of the capital capacity of public bodies. Between the two statements one wonders where we are. On the one hand, it is suggested that the Government are not supposed to initiate sanitary or waterworks schemes, while on the other hand the Minister points out that the capital capacity of public bodies is limited. I would like to point out that, as far as public bodies are concerned, there is such a thing as a limitation of borrowing powers, and that that limitation has not been raised since the war. To-day a great many public bodies have reached that limit and, when the value of money is contrasted, the position is entirely different to what it was in 1914. I think the sooner the Minister gives his attention to that aspect of the question the better.

It is very hard to discuss this question in the absence of information that one would expect would have been given to the House. I would like to know whether or not the public authorities in a particular area where relief is to be given are required to put up any proportion of the money for relief schemes, and, if so, what are the schemes that the Government propose should be carried out. For instance, in urban areas what I would like to see done would be the preparation of sites for housing. Anyone who has had anything to do with housing schemes recently knows that the initial expenses for levelling sites, laying down new sewers and water mains, add considerably to the rent that has to be charged the tenants. If money has to be borrowed for that purpose, it follows that in calculating the price of such houses those expenses have to be charged against the rents, and they make it costly on the tenants. I would urge on the Minister that where there is unemployment in towns, and where housing schemes are about to be carried out, this money should be allocated for the clearing of sites and for the preparation of the ground.

The Minister also dealt with the question of the rating area for waterworks and sewerage schemes, and suggested that a rate of 1d. in the £ might be struck for that purpose. He suggested that he would make an arrangement by which a rate of 1d. in the £ might be struck by each county for that purpose. In my opinion that is a rather indiscriminate proposal which will not deal with the problem. The proper way to deal with it is to have a flat county rate for waterworks and sanitary schemes. It should be the concern of the whole county that each area should have waterworks and sanitary accommodation. I would appeal to the Minister not to deal with this matter in a haphazard way, but to take his courage in his hands and insist that there should be a flat county rate to deal with sewerage and water schemes. We all know very well that the reason for small towns under public health authorities that are not urbanised at the moment being in an insanitary state or being without water is due to the fact that the area of charge is too small, and it is prohibitive so far as the ratepayers in that particular district are concerned. If the Minister wants to have the small towns that are not urbanised made sanitary, and all the rest of it, he certainly should have the courage to do this. Unless he does this, these things will not be done. As I said at the beginning, I would like to believe that things were as the President painted them last week. I am not a bit doubtful. I know quite well, and he ought to know, that the position is entirely different, and if we want to deal with this matter thoroughly it should be more than £300,000 that the Dáil is asked to vote. One does not like periodical doles given to the people. One would prefer to see industry improving in the country, but it is absolutely necessary, and I hope it will be before the debate is concluded, that some member of the Executive Council should give the House an idea of how the money is to be spent, because, afterwards, if the regulations are left in the hands of two or three Departments, it will lead to doles which will not be good for the country or the unemployed.

Mr. Davis

I find it a little difficult to know what to say in connection with this Vote. At the outset I understood that it was a Vote of £300,000 for the relief of unemployment and distress, but many efforts have been made by Deputies on the opposite benches to turn that Vote for the relief of unemployment and distress to a vote of censure on the Government. By some of the Deputies we are told it is a Vote for a general election. I think, unless my memory does not serve me right, that we were told something similar in October and November, 1927. The general election was over then, but we were told we were to have another election in the spring of 1928. That prophecy has not materialised. Listening to Deputies on the opposite benches one would come to the conclusion that the Irish Free State was in the position of an enlarged workhouse and nothing else. We have all some idea of the financial position of the country, and I think any man who has the courage of his convictions and has a conscience and an ambition to tell the truth will acknowledge that this State is more prosperous and is in a sounder financial position than any other country we know at present. I heard some Deputies on the opposite benches say that the increase in home assistance was a real indication of the financial position of the people of the country. I wonder would Deputies of some experience on local public bodies have the manliness and straightforwardness to speak the truth?

The present expenditure on home assistance is no indication of the financial position. The whole position has been created as a result of the county-at-large rating instead of district rating. In my own county there is one union where the expenditure on home assistance, or outdoor relief as it then was, prior to the amalgamation, was £400 and now it is £1,500. That is the result of every portion of the county being made responsible for an equal share. What is everybody's business is nobody's business. Prior to the change every district councillor was made responsible for the rate within his area, because we had district rating. When we had district rating it was the duty of a district councillor to see that the rate in his area was the lowest at the end of the year. Now the ambition is to have the most money spent within the area at the end of the year. If not, the representative is a very bad one and he will get his marching papers at the end of his term of office. Therefore, I say that the amount expended on home assistance is not a true index of the financial position. Admittedly there is acute distress. I do not know but that it would be right for me to support this vote of censure on the Government, because we know that the distress is due to abnormal weather conditions and the Government have not devised some means by which the weather conditions can be changed. That is the attitude of Deputies on the opposite benches and on other benches, that the Government is responsible for the weather conditions in this country. Is there not a limit even to absurdity? I think that limit has been reached here this evening.

I have listened in vain to hear one Deputy acknowledge that the present position is due to the abnormal conditions that have prevailed this year in the Free State. It is acknowledged by the Government itself that the necessity for assistance has arisen as a result of the abnormal weather conditions and, to a certain extent, the terrible privations of people in America at the present time will make matters worse, because people in the Free State who received substantial sums from their friends in America in the past will hardly receive them this year. Therefore, I say that all credit is due to the Government for anticipating the conditions that may arise. I am sure that they are as practical and as honest as ever, and I think it is not quite fair that insinuations should be made that this is a preliminary to a general election. We had that prophecy in October and November of 1927 but it did not materialise and I do not think it is going to materialise now. I think it will be greatly to the disappointment of Deputies opposite that it is not going to materialise. I congratulate the Government on their efforts to relieve distress. I am sure that the money that is going to be voted will be judiciously expended, with advantage to the people concerned and credit to the Government.

Mr. Clery

I move to report progress.

The Dáil went out of Committee.

Progress reported. The Committee to sit again on Thursday.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. to 3 p.m. on Thursday.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht - Wednesday, 26 Nov 1930

Private Business. - Vote No. 70.—Relief Schemes.

Mr. O'Connell

Mr. Hogan (Clare):

Mr. Hogan

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 26 Nov 1930