Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 5 Jul 1933

Vol. 48 No. 13

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Laoighis Cottage Schemes.

asked the Minister for Local Government and Public Health if he will state the date when the constructional work in connection with the erection of nine houses by the Laoighis County Board of Health at Portlaoighise, County Leix, was completed; whether a final certificate for payment of the total amount due to the contractor has been issued by the county engineer; whether the original estimate of the engineer and the tender accepted by the Board of Health included the cost of fencing the cottages and what is the cause of the delay in getting the cottages referred to.

The Laoighis Board of Health were notified by the county surveyor at their meeting on the 21st March last that the erection of the nine cottages in question was completed. He also reported that the fencing of the plots attached to the cottages had not been done. The contractor's liability for fencing the plots was subsequently referred to the Board's solicitor, who advised them that under the contractor's bond he was bound to execute the fencing works. The Board has served notice on the contractor requiring him to complete the contract. The delay in letting the cottages appears to be attributable to the dispute which has arisen in regard to the responsibility for fencing.

asked the Minister for Local Government and Public Health if he will state the amount of the original estimate submitted to the Laoighis County Board of Health for the provision of working class houses on the grounds of the Patrician College, Mountrath, County Leix; whether the work is being carried out by direct labour and whether the men presently employed were recruited through the local labour exchange; what is the rate of wages paid to unskilled labourers and whether same was fixed without consultation with local trades union representatives, also whether a revised estimate for the cost of the scheme has yet been submitted to and sanctioned by his Department, and, if so, what is the cause and amount of the revised estimate.

The original estimate for this work was £3,023 5/-. I considered this figure excessive and amended plans were submitted which reduced the cost to £1,957 6/-. The work is being carried out by direct labour. There is no information as to the manner of recruitment of the labour engaged on the scheme. The rate of wages paid to unskilled labourers on this scheme is 32/- per week. I have no information on the question of consultation with the local trade union representatives, nor am I in a position to express any opinion as to the ultimate cost of the work.

Would the Parliamentary Secretary consider the advisability of suggesting to the county engineer concerned, and the Board of Health, that they should pay the recognised rate of wages as obliged under the Housing Act, 1932?

If it is found on inquiry that they are not paying the recognised rate of wages, representations will be made to them.

If it is a fact that the local trade union rate is not paid, or that the county surveyor fixed the rate of 32/- without previous consultation with the Board of Health, or the representatives of the local trade union concerned, will the Parliamentary Secretary take the necessary steps to have the matter remedied?

The Parliamentary Secretary is not aware of that, but inquiries will be made.

Barr
Roinn