I move:—
That a supplementary sum not exceeding £35,000 be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1952, for Employment and Emergency Schemes (including Relief of Distress).
Committee on Finance. - Vote 10—Employment and Emergency Schemes.
A total sum of £73,000 is required to meet additional expenditure on (1) development works in bogs used by landholders and other private producers of turf (sub-head 1), and on (2) rural improvements schemes (sub-head K). Savings on other sub-heads will amount to £38,000 so that the net additional sum required is £35,000.
In furtherance of the policy to encourage the production of hand-won turf by private producers in the 1951 season, arrangements were made at a very early stage in the financial year to carry out the urgent bog development works for which reports and estimates of cost were already available. During the course of the year reports were received on further works of equal urgency which could not be neglected without serious detriment to the turf production campaign. The sum of £90,000 originally provided under sub-head I was found to be quite insufficient to meet the cost of all the works which it has been necessary to carry out. The total sum required in excess of the original provision is £48,000.
The additional amount required for rural improvement schemes is £25,000. In the year 1950-51 a large number of offers of grants under the scheme were accepted by the landholders at a late stage in the financial year. Because of this, and also due to the effect of bad weather in slowing up the execution of works during the winter of 1950-51, there was an abnormally heavy commitment against the sub-head at the beginning of the current financial year in respect of uncompleted works. The provision of £125,000 for 1951-52 was found to be insufficient to clear off this commitment, and at the same time to meet the cost of new schemes for which there has been a continuing heavy demand during the current financial year.
Could the Parliamentary Secretary tell us to what value are applications actually pending at the moment and awaiting this Estimate?
Under which heading?
Both headings in the Supplementary Estimate.
I cannot tell you exactly regarding the bog development schemes but under the other, there were about 197.
I meant in terms of money. In other words, will the Supplementary Estimate now put forward be completely exhausted by all the applications that are awaiting the Supplementary Estimate or is there sufficient in the Supplementary Estimate to cover further applications between now and the close of the financial year?
I think there is sufficient to cover all the work that it will be possible to carry out between now and the end of the financial year.
I listened with some surprise a few days ago, and previously to the Parliamentary Secretary-probably also to his predecessor-stating that he had not received certain applications which had been sent into his Department. This happened in one case where I was concerned some time ago. I cannot understand why the Parliamentary Secretary can get up in the House and give that kind of answer to a Deputy who has a postcard from his Department acknowledging receipt of a particular application. I want to know from the Parliamentary Secretary whether there is a special register kept of all the applications in his Department; if so, how many of these still remain to be examined even at the end of a fairly lengthy period. I think there is no justifiable explanation, at least no justifiable explanation can be given to me for the failure of the Department concerned to examine applications that have been sent in a year or two ago. I would like to know if there are many such applications awaiting examination or whether all these cases are now being provided for under the Supplementary Estimate introduced by the Parliamentary Secretary?
I would like to draw the attention of the Parliamentary Secretary to the fact that in my constituency of North Mayo there are quite a number of applicants under the rural improvement schemes who have made applications as far back as 12 months or in some cases 18 months ago and I feel that when delay occurs under a scheme like the rural improvement scheme there is something wrong. I would like to impress upon the Parliamentary Secretary that these rural improvement works are very important works particularly in an area like North Mayo where you have a considerable number of unemployed persons who have to migrate. Meeting some of my constituents recently I came across quite a number of such cases.
I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to take this matter up with his officials with a view to having these works speeded up. It is only fair to say about his officials that when I visited the rural improvements department in Dublin I found nothing but courtesy in that department; but I have been told that some of these works have been held up due to scarcity of money. Therefore, if the voting of this sum here to-day will speed up these works, I am certainly with it. In regard to turf production was the money for improvement of roads?
Roads, drains and bogs used by private producers?
Is it something new?
No, it is not.
It is continuing?
Yes.
I would like also to say that in a recent discussion by the Mayo Country Council it was emphasised by members of the various political groups there that the people in Mayo generally, North and South, were most anxious to contribute to the national pool of turf by way of producing turf by private methods. I think that in an area like North Mayo, where many people have to migrate, we must also consider that due to family circumstances there are many who cannot migrate. They may have a couple of acres of bog and the father of a family whose children may be young may not be free to go across to England or take up permanent employment even locally. The production of turf by private methods could supplement that uneconomic holder's income. A man, by cutting, saving and stacking on the roadside a couple of stacks of turf may reap a harvest of turf that would bring him in £50 or £100. That, I respectfully submit to the Parliamentary Secretary, is a very useful thing and a very useful sum of money to a man who has an uneconomic holding.
On the other side of the picture, from the point of view of making sure of adequate supplies of turf for our requirements for the winter, it will also be a great help in building up our reserves.
I appeal very earnestly to the Parliamentary Secretary to give us special consideration in that regard in Mayo generally. In many parts of Crossmolina and Ballycroy there are large tracts of bog out of which it is quite impossible for the tenants to haul turf because of the bad condition of the roads. That applies to many areas in Mayo, areas too numerous to mention. If the Parliamentary Secretary gives us a little consideration in the matter of improving these bog roads he can rest assured that the people in my part of the country will be quite prepared to take off their coats and work hard to produce the greatest possible amount of good quality hand-won turf. I earnestly appeal to him to do what he can for us.
I hope that this Supplementary Estimate will be sufficient to do the job satisfactorily. In North Tipperary we have large tracts of bog in the hands of private owners. These owners find it impossible to get at their turbary because of the bad conditions of the roads and because of lack of proper drainage. Deputy Davin raised the question last week as regards complaints about applications. As far as I recollect I sent up a number of applications for the drainage of a bog held by about 25 tenants. I got a blue card in reply stating that the matter was receiving attention but so far nothing has been done.
I hope the money voted now will be adequate for the work that has to be carried out. I know plenty of people who, if the roads and bogs were properly maintained, would be more than willing to cut turf because it would be a great help to them in making a living.
I do not want to be misunderstood by the Parliamentary Secretary in view of what the last speaker has said. I intervened, as possibly Deputy Fanning knows, some considerable time ago in the case of the O'Meara application. Reference was made to that here last week by the Parliamentary Secretary. This bog is right over the border of Laoighis-Offaly in the adjoining parish and I cannot understand why it has taken so long to have that application properly investigated or an inspector sent down; nor can I understand the delay in sanctioning an urgent scheme of this kind.
In view of the importance of turf production I think the Parliamentary Secretary should give high priority to all applications for drainage and accommodation roads to bogs. This is a matter of urgency now. A good deal has been said about the delay in dealing with applications. To some extent I have a certain amount of sympathy with the Office of Public Works because very often when everything has been done a scheme falls through for some reason or other. I think that happens in a great number of cases. Something should be done to ensure that once a scheme has been prepared at the request of the affected parties it will not be allowed to fall through. I realise that this may be a difficult and a delicate matter. Very often when people discover what the cost of the scheme will be one or two of the affected parties may refuse to contribute. That is very unfortunate and I think that is a matter that should be examined with a view to implementing some scheme which will persuade such people to fall into line in order to avoid the injury they can now do to those who want a scheme, the cost to the State and the injustice in many cases inflicted upon the other applicants. Very often the person who would derive the greatest benefit is in favour of going ahead with the scheme and quite prepared to contribute to it while the person who happens to be nearest to the public road and who will not, therefore, derive much benefit will be against the scheme.
Points were raised by Deputy Davin and Deputy Fanning in relation to applications that they contend—and I am sure they are correct in their contention—were made. In my reply a week ago I stated that from the information set out in the question these applications could not be traced. That happens quite often. It is possible that applications were made but unfortunately they were not made on the prescribed forms.
Probably.
Every Deputy interested in bog development, minor employment schemes or rural improvement schemes should understand that there are special prescribed forms in the Office of Public Works obtainable by Deputies or private individuals for the purpose of making applications in the proper manner. These forms are quite simple. They set out the county, the rural district, the townland, the nature of the work, the number of people concerned and the name of the person who will act as correspondent for the people. If my memory serves me aright, all these forms are numbered and when the applications are sent in it is quite easy to have them filed county by county and rural district by rural district. In that case there is no question of their being lost. Many Deputies, however, just write an ordinary letter pointing out that there is a bog at a certain place. They very often apply the local term which may not be the term on the ordnance survey sheet or on the map. If they looked up the instructions sent out with the forms and followed those instructions, there would be no question of their application being subsequently lost or mislaid.
Reference has been made to the delay in the inspection of schemes submitted. As far as the Office of Public Works is concerned there is no avoidable delay. Last year this question of providing money for bog development for bogs in the hands of private producers came to the forefront about the month of February and £90,000 was provided in the Estimate for the year 1951-52 for that purpose. A large portion of that money was allocated fairly early on and in order to do the work and get off to an early start it was necessary for the people concerned in the Special Employment Schemes Office to go through schemes that had been submitted about two years previously in order to find out which schemes could be dealt with most expeditiously and which would give the speediest return. As time went on it was found that there were other schemes of an urgent nature on which reports later became available and it was then discovered that the £90,000 was exhausted. In order to do the other schemes that had been vetted, examined and approved fresh money was required. A certain amount of money, £30,000, was got from savings under other sub-heads. We now require more money both for bog development schemes and rural improvement schemes and that is what we are asking for in this Supplementary Estimate and I expect we will get it.
Deputy O'Hara mentioned the rural improvement schemes. Our inspectorial staff was not up to their required number until quite recently, particularly in County Mayo. In view of the urgency of going ahead with bog development schemes, the inspectors were switched over to bog development for a considerable time. It was only in the latter part of the year 1951 that they were switched over to examining the rural improvement schemes. It was held that rural improvement schemes, principally the construction of roads to villages, could be more easily carried out than bog development schemes which are usually carried out in the fine period of the year. The staff has been brought up to strength now. I expect that the work will be speeded up and that there will be less delay.
As far as bog development works of this kind are concerned, I am very glad that the Deputies are anxious about them. I am anxious about them myself because I know quite well what it means to have a bad road going into a bog and to have to take advantage of the period of the year which has the finest weather in order to try to get out the turf and neglect the other crops as a result. As far as I am concerned—I believe it is Government policy too—I will give every assistance, but there are certain difficulties. The examination of all the schemes cannot be done in one year but we propose to carry on and do the most worth while schemes and, if possible, give preference to bogs where turf is produced for commercial use, that is, where turf is produced by the local people to supply the needs of the local towns. That is all I have to say on the matter.
Should not Deputies who seek information from the Department have a reply within a reasonable time? This procedure is observed in every other Department except the Land Commission. Local people are inclined to think because a scheme has not been sanctioned that the Deputies concerned just sat down.
I think it is usual to send an acknowledgment.
Would not the Parliamentary Secretary agree that Deputies are entitled to a reply within a reasonable time stating either that the scheme has been sanctioned or not? In the latter event they should be told why not.
That would impose a considerable amount of extra work on the staff and I think that the acknowledgment should be sufficient. If, at any time, a Deputy gets on the phone to the Special Employments Branch and gives the particulars of any scheme in which he may be particularly interested, I am sure he will get all the information it is possible to give him. I think that is fair enough.
I think there should be sufficient staff in the Department.
When a Deputy or anybody else sends in an application in respect of a scheme he gets back a blue printed card. It should be possible, when that card is being sent, to have the appropriate reference number put on it. The reference number is not usually put on the card. Instead a heading with the name of the bog or something like that is put on it. If the reference number is not put on the card and if it is necessary at a later stage to telephone in connection with the matter, the reference in question has to be found.
I will have that matter considered.
On a point of information. My experience of the staff engaged on public employment schemes is that they are very efficient. The Deputies opposite appear to seek to give the impression that the officers in that particular department——
The Chair understood you to have a question which you desired to put to the Parliamentary Secretary.
I wish to ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether it would be possible to deal with an individual who out of a number of individuals objects to the building of a particular path into a townland. As Deputy Cogan has stated, this can hold up a whole scheme. I think it is only fair that there should be some way of dealing with that individual.
There is no legislation to enable us to deal with that at the present.
Vote put and agreed to.