Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 11 Mar 1953

Vol. 137 No. 1

Private Deputies' Business. - Local Authorities (Works) Act— Motion.

Mr. Finan

Before moving this motion, I ask the permission of the Chair to make a technical alteration with regard to the year mentioned in the motion—the year 1952-3. This motion was put down a considerable time ago. For that reason, I ask the permission of the Chair to alter the motion to read as follows:—

That, with a view to putting a greater area of land into productive condition and as a means of stimulating rural employment, Dáil Éireann is of opinion that the grants under the Local Authorities (Works) Act for the year 1953-54 should be raised to the 1950-51 level.

An Ceann Comhairle

I think I can allow the Deputy to make that alteration.

Mr. Finan

I move:—

That, with a view to putting a greater area of land into productive condition and as a means of stimulating rural employment, Dáil Éireann is of opinion that the grants under the Local Authorities (Works) Actfor the year 1953-54 should be raised to the 1950-51 level.

Deputy Beirne and myself felt constrained to put down this motion, because we believe that nothing is more conducive to the economic development of the country than the drainage of the land. I think it has been admitted by Government Ministers within recent times that agriculture is the mainstay of our economy and that on its development will depend the development of secondary industries. We believe that, in the present condition of vast areas of land, the full production which the nation demands cannot be achieved until a proper system of drainage is carried out. I want to make it quite clear that, in anything I may say, I do not wish to minimise in any way the importance of the Arterial Drainage Act of 1945. I wish, however, to emphasise that works carried out under that Act are necessarily slow, and that it will take a very long time before the complete arterial drainage of this country can be achieved. In the meantime, I submit that much valuable work could be done by the fullest possible implementation of the Local Authorities (Works) Act. I venture to say, also, that no legislation in this country received a greater welcome from the farming community than the Local Authorities (Works) Act and the land rehabilitation scheme. I agree with what the Minister for Finance said here to-night, to a certain extent. These two schemes are interdependent and the successful operation of the one depends on the successful operation of the other. I do not think it fair, however, to suggest—as the Minister suggested to-night—that to reduce the money available under the Local Authorities (Works) Act and to increase the money available under the land rehabilitation scheme is a proper way of attacking the problem.

I am sure that the Minister is aware, as the House is aware, that many people are clamouring for schemes under the land rehabilitation project but such schemes cannot be undertaken until the outfalls are first completedand drained off. In my county many tenants have made application for work under the land rehabilitation project but when the inspectors or officials call—while they agree that the work is very necessary and would be of value—they say that it would be impossible to carry out the scheme until the local authority had first done its share of the work. In almost every county in this State there are—comparatively, at least—vast areas of land lying undeveloped and unproductive. They are in that condition for one reason only, namely, that they are water-logged from one end of the year to the other. Would the work of developing these lands and making them productive not be a sound investment for any Government? I want to emphasise at this stage that there is nothing political in this motion. There are rural Deputies on all sides of the House. These Deputies realise how those schemes are welcomed by people, irrespective of their political affiliations. Much work needs to be done and can be done if local authorities went into it with enthusiasm. They submitted schemes—councillors, at least, submitted schemes to the county engineers, some of which were sent to the Department of Local Government. Subsequently, it became the custom to direct the county engineers that only schemes which come within certain financial limits should be submitted. In my county we are very much perturbed by the attitude of the Department in regard to this matter. That will readily be appreciated when one remembers that for the year 1950-51 County Roscommon received £51,000 in grants. For the year 1951-52 we received £33,000. Last year, 1952-53, that sum was reduced to £15,500. A sum of £15,500 is a negligible amount of money for anything in the way of drainage on a county basis. No sensible person will suggest that, over an indefinite period, vast amounts of money should be provided. I think, however, it is reasonable to submit that, for the first five years at any rate, substantial sums of money should be made available for the work. It is well known that periods of long neglect have resulted in making this a very big task.

Those Deputies who are members of local authorities know that, since the passing of the Arterial Drainage Act, 1945, it is not legal for any authority to undertake any drainage work except in certain approved drainage areas—and then, in such areas, only the merest maintenance work can be done. Last year, the Estimate was reduced by something in the neighbourhood of £400,000 and for the coming year there is a further reduction of £250.000. There is a very familiar ring about the sum of £250,000 in this House. It has been mentioned here time and time again for some weeks past. It happens to be just the precise sum of money which has been referred to so often in the past few weeks—a sum of money devoted to a different purpose. I think that the reduction in the Estimate shows a complete lack of appreciation of the importance of the agricultural industry in this country. At least, it convinces me that the Government is not aware that the first step towards achieving full agricultural production is the putting of the land into proper condition. In the Minister's county, in my county, and in every county, farmers are constantly crying out to have something done about the drainage of the land. In 1950-51 there was rejoicing amongst the farming community because they expected that, until the job was completed, substantial sums of money would be made available for this essential work. I suggest to the Minister that he should take up this matter with his colleague the Minister for Finance in order to see if any alteration can be made in the present allocation for this important work. Would it not be a far better economic proposition to provide money for putting the land of Ireland into proper condition to produce food for the people than for people who will do nothing, people who must degrade and demoralise themselves by parading every week at the local civic guard barracks in order to get money for which they have no respect and which is of little practical value to them?

I submit that this is a matter which the Minister could usefully discuss withhis Cabinet colleagues. I believe that they, as well as every member of the House must think on this matter in the same way as the sponsors of this motion do. I submit that we are making a sane suggestion to the Minister, and that in this year there should be a very substantial increase in the provision of money under this head. I believe that it is money that could be well spent, and that might even yield political dividends to the Minister.

Mr. Beirne

I formally second the motion.

Mr. Rooney

I want to support what the previous speakers have said on this motion. The arterial drainage plan announced in 1945, was a recognition of the urgent need there is for drainage work which is not progressing quickly enough to make manifest the advantages expected from the 1945 Act. Arterial drainage, as carried on, is a slow process. I believe it is to extend over a period of 26 years. We think that a good deal of work was done during the last few years in connection with minor drainage. That is work which should go hand in hand with arterial drainage.

The Local Authorities (Works) Act was operated successfully in conjunction with the land project and so enabled farmers to make their land more productive. We know, however, that many areas in the country are flooded and water-logged. That is mainly caused by water overflowing from streams and small rivers. I am aware that when local authorities made application to have drainage work carried out on these streams and small rivers, the reply they got from the authorities was that the work should be done under the Arterial Drainage Act and had been so listed under that Act. The result is that the advantages, which could be obtained from the land project and the Local Authorities (Works) Acts, are to a great extent nullified. The latter Act was designed to bring drainage relief to many areas as soon as possible.

My opinion is that a general drainage plan for the country must be approached in a more vigorous way. If its execution is going to extend overa period of 26 years, I believe that nothing very effective will be done. The Government should see that effect is given to the plan more speedily. The Local Authorities (Works) Act was operated very successfully during the period of the inter-Party Government and brought great advantage to those farmers who also wanted to avail of the land project. The position to-day is that they are not able to take advantage of the land project because the Department of Agriculture will not sanction the drainage of their land until arrangements are first made to take the water off it. That is the purpose for which the Local Authorities (Works) Act was designed.

If the Minister is not going to carry out the latter Act, can he tell us whether he intends to do anything better for the farmers under the Arterial Drainage Act of 1945 than is being done at present? I agree, of course, that that Act was effective where it was implemented. But, taking the country as a whole, one must admit that it will be a very long time before proper drainage schemes under that Act can be carried out. The result will be that a lot of our land must remain derelict for the next 20 years or probably longer if something is not done speedily. If the Minister would accept this motion it would mean that many farmers could get immediate advantage from the Local Authorities (Works) Act. That is an Act which, I think, everyone must admit brought great advantage to the nation and to the farmers.

Mr. D.J. O'Sullivan

I also wish to support this motion. I am well aware of the good results produced in many rural areas by the Local Authorities (Works) Act. It is fitting, I think, that tribute should be paid to the late Mr. T.J. Murphy who, during his term as Minister for Local Government, was the originator of that Act. It was a measure which brought new hope to very many people in rural Ireland in possession of water-logged and low-lying land.

The estimate for the work to be done under that Act in the coming year reflects the very big reduction of£640,000 compared to what was payable two years ago. I suggest that such a substantial reduction practically means the death knell of the scheme. I think that is a great pity because there are many people who are willing to operate schemes under the land project but are debarred from doing so because they must wait for the outfalls to be created by the clearances under the Local Authorities (Works) Act.

Some years ago, when local bodies desired to take up such schemes, they were confronted by many difficulties. The position to-day is that the rates have increased to such an extent in recent years that it is beyond the capacity of local bodies to do anything effective in this way. The Local Authorities (Works) Act was welcomed extensively because it was administered locally and the money was provided from the Central Fund, which meant that there was no corresponding increase in rates. It had the added advantage that it assisted those most in need of assistance.

There are demands from all quarters for increased production, for more tillage, for more cattle to be carried on farms. That can be done only if the land is drained and fertilised. There are drainage schemes in operation and a great deal of good work is being carried out under arterial drainage but I submit that the Local Authorities (Works) Act provided for schemes that every local councillor, no matter what his politics, was only too anxious to push forward.

The reduction in flooding brought about by work carried out under that Act saved the Roads Estimate considerably inasmuch as it freed many low-lying roads that had been ravaged by winter flooding. In my constituency there is a considerable amount of work still to be carried out. The main road, extending some 40 odd miles to the City of Cork, was in years back on many occasions flooded at various points. As a result of clearances carried out under the Local Authorities (Works) Act, there has not been an instance of flooding on that road in the past few years.

Where work has been completed, the people have been encouraged to go inand to continue the work by extensive drainage and fertilising. A great deal of land which could not carry a machine in the past is now cleared by mowing machines. Lime distributors are able to go on land which formerly, because of flooding, could not be brought into full production. Many farmers in my district who depend on upland meadowing suffered great losses in the past. It was a gamble to go in on them to cut the crop. More often than not, it was full of grit. There were various obstacles, barbed wire, and so on, brought along by floods, and their machines were damaged in the operation of hay-cutting. As a result of work carried out under the Local Authorities (Works) Act, they are saved from the perils which affected them in the past. Furthermore, they can now manure this land, safe in the knowledge that a flood will not sweep away the manures.

The extension of the Act was expected to continue for some time. The majority of my constituents were very seriously perturbed when the grants were reduced last year. They regard the present reduction with some misgiving because they see money being spent in other directions which have not the same employment content as works under the Local Authorities (Works) Act have.

People who are trying to eke out a livelihood, in very many instances on poor farms, deserve any help which the State can give them. It is not encouraging when they realise that they must maintain an army of unemployed that could be very usefully engaged in works such as were envisaged under the Local Authorities (Works) Act and which were proceeding well until the funds were curtailed. I would appeal to the Minister to devote as much money as possible to the purpose of resuming full activity under that Act.

Too many people are restricted in their efforts to increase production by reason of the fact that their land is water-logged. Young cattle develop diseases from drinking stagnant water. That can be borne out by veterinary surgeons. Farmers who drained their lands over the years were well repaidin the improved health of their live stock.

I heartily support this motion. Seeing that the Government can find money for people who do not need it half as badly and who are not contributing nearly as much to the benefit of the country as the people who would benefit by an extension of the Local Authorities (Works) Act, I would earnestly suggest that some of the huge sums that are so readily made available to people who have plenty of capital should be made available under the Local Authorities (Works) Act to help those who are trying to maintain themselves and their families against ever-increasing losses and new problems that arise every day. The solution to the problem facing these people is to ensure that their little holdings will be made economic, that they can carry more stock, that they will be able to till their fields without fear of their crops being swept away by floods.

The Local Authorities (Works) Act was working well. There was not a complaint from any county councillor against the scheme. Why was it curtailed? No more suitable scheme could be adopted for the employment of the army of unemployed that we have to-day. Every penny spent on schemes under that Act would go into the pockets of people who are living on the dole and would give them a standard of living which the miserable pittance they collect every week could not give them. It is a matter for regret that the amount of money provided for the scheme is reduced. The work being carried out is negligible in comparison with the many worthwhile schemes submitted and passed by the Department and, in many instances, completed a few years back. I have schemes in mind which would have brought prosperity to my home locality if they had been completed and which would have saved many industrious people loss from flooding in wintertime. Tributaries of a larger river swell out over these lands. That discourages people from cultivating low-lying land.

The land I am speaking of must be continually nursed. The people must keep making drains in it, clearingwater courses, liming and fertilising it and, as I said, it was a very wrong thing to curtail the money which was being provided for such work. There was a united response from the people to that scheme which was an excellent one. I have paid tribute to the memory of the man who introduced it. I am proud to be a county man of the late Deputy Murphy who introduced that scheme which in such a short time brought such benefit to so many. I appeal to the Minister and to the Government to extend that scheme and complete the work which was so well begun.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

If no Deputy offers himself, the Chair will have to put the question.

Mr. Blowick

Surely the Minister has some interest in it.

Minister for Local Government (Mr. Smith)

There are three hours allowed for the motion.

Mr. D.J. O'Sullivan

Surely some of the rural representatives on the Government side have some interest in the operations of this scheme.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair has no function in the matter.

Mr. D.J. O'Sullivan

Has the Minister?

Mr. Smith

I would not like to tell you. I will keep it dark for a while.

Mr. Blowick

What does the Minister think of the motion? Will he say in one word whether he agrees with it or not?

Mr. Smith

It is hard to express oneself in one word on most questions.

Mr. Blowick

That is a very profound statement from the Minister.

Mr. Smith

I would not like to be otherwise than profound when speaking to the Deputy.

Mr. Blowick

For the last 12 months we have had statements from Ministers making an appeal for more production, particularly on the land. I submit that this motion deals with a matterwhich is of importance in connection with greater production on the land and yet the Minister for Local Government has refused to speak to the motion. There are five Fianna Fáil Deputies on the benches behind the Minister. The interest which the Government Party is taking in this motion has been shown by the Minister refusing to speak on the motion while these Deputies seem to get great amusement out of it. If Deputy Blaney, Deputy Carter and Deputy Fanning had to make a living on a small holding of land half of which was under water I wonder would they display the same sarcasm towards this motion. The Minister will send out the sheriff if the rates are not paid on this derelict and useless land. If these Deputies were in that position perhaps they would not treat it as a joke.

Mr. Blaney

We are not treating it as a joke.

Mr. Blowick

You are treating it as a joke. There are five of these Deputies there who could speak on this motion to-night. I will not submit to these ignorant or sarcastic interruptions. These people will be asking farmers to give them votes and support them whenever the next election comes. These farmers, of course, have no knowledge of the duplicity of these Deputies in the House when a motion comes up which is in the interest of the farmers.

Mr. Blaney

The Deputy has not much backing on his side of the House.

Mr. Blowick

Deputy Blaney says that there is not much backing for this motion on this side of the House. Already, in less than half an hour, four Deputies have spoken on this motion from this side of the House while Fianna Fáil Deputies have all cleared off. The farmers do not matter to them so long as they can get their votes at an election. The farmers can swim in the water that is inundating their land while Deputies can sit there and laugh at the fools who voted them in. The Minister or the Minister for Industry and Commerce can go to some dinner in Dublin——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is getting far away from the motion.

Mr. Blowick

The point is that Deputies are laughing at this motion and treating it as a joke and Ministers in after-dinner speeches are asking farmers to work harder while at the same time they are cutting down a scheme which would be of some benefit to the farmers and help them to extend production. The Minister for Finance to-night made great play with the fact that the Vote for the land rehabilitation scheme was increased this year. My answer to that is: "The devil thank him." The Government took over a scheme which was initiated by Deputy Dillon and was fully working.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is discussing another scheme now.

Mr. Blowick

I am discussing the land rehabilitation scheme. I submit that we cannot separate the land rehabilitation scheme from the Local Authorities (Works) Act.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The motion deals with the Local Authorities (Works) Act.

Mr. Blowick

The reason that Act was initiated was that when the inter-Party Government sought to put the land rehabilitation scheme into operation we found we were hamstrung by the fact that most of the small rivers and main drains were choked and that the land rehabilitation scheme could not succeed without the Local Authorities (Works) Act being brought into operation. I submit that the Local Authorities (Works) Act and the land rehabilitation scheme are interdependent, that you cannot separate them. It is impossible to discuss one of them without discussing the other to some extent. Knowing the factors that caused the inter-Party Government to introduce the Bill here and pass it through this House, I submit one cannot discuss one without discussing the other to a very great extent.

In the year 1950 £1,900,000 was made available by the inter-Party Government for drainage work under theLocal Authorities (Works) Act. In the following year almost a similar amount was made available. There was, if I remember correctly, a slight reduction in the figure in 1951 as compared with 1950. The present Government took office in June, 1951. They did not send to the county councils the sum we had earmarked for expenditure under the Local Authorities (Works) Act in that year. Last year it was reduced to £1,650,000 and this year it is reduced to £400,000. The Minister for Finance tells us that the land rehabilitation scheme is up by £357,000. It should be up by at least three times that amount were it not for the deliberate brake put on that scheme by the present Government.

The present Minister for Agriculture took over at a time when all the machinery had been procured and staff trained. The scheme was just getting into its stride when the change came. Now because there is an increase of a miserable £357,000 the Minister for Finance tells us that that is a salve for cutting down work under the Local Authorities (Works) Act by £350,000 this year.

I believe the Act has been sacrificed for the purchase of Tulyar. It is more than significant that the amount under this sub-head in the Estimate for the Department of Local Government has been reduced this year by exactly the amount of the purchase price of this racehorse. The average man will ask himself is it by chance that the two figures are identical.

(Interruptions.)

If Deputy Blaney wants to make a speech he will have plenty of time to do so. I hope I will have an opportunity of telling the people in Donegal between now and the next election exactly what Deputy Blaney thinks of drainage work under the Local Authorities (Works) Act. I warn him that I will make it my business to let the people of Donegal know, and if they want to vote for a two-faced person in the next general election——

Mr. Blaney

Is it parliamentary for a Deputy to describe another as a two-faced person?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I think Deputy Blowick should withdraw that remark.

Mr. Blowick

The remark I made, and I repeat it in case the Chair may not have heard it, was that I would give the people of Donegal an opportunity of making up their minds whether they would vote for a two-faced person when the next general election comes.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I think the expression should be withdrawn.

Mr. Blowick

With all due respect, the expression may not apply to any member of the House, present or absent.

Mr. Blaney

The Deputy was talking with particular reference to me—the Deputy from Donegal.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Blowick made a statement with reference to Deputy Blaney, and I ask Deputy Blowick now to withdraw.

Mr. Blowick

I will withdraw since you ask me, but I did not make the statement in reference to Deputy Blaney. I want to point out the two-faced attitude of Deputy Blaney here and I said I would put that before the people when the next election comes.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is now repeating the statement he withdrew a few moments ago. If he persists in that I will have to ask him to resume his seat.

Mr. Blowick

If you hold, Sir, that my remark refers to Deputy Blayney, I withdraw.

Mr. Blaney

Either the Deputy withdraws or he does not.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy has withdrawn it.

Mr. Blowick

Deputy Blaney thinks he will wriggle out of this.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We are not discussing Deputy Blaney. We are discussing the Local Authorities (Works) Act.

Mr. Blowick

I will take the first opportunity of telling the people in Donegal what happened here and I anticipate that the Rules of Order that apply here will not apply there.

Mr. Blaney

The people of Donegal can read, in case the Deputy does not know.

Mr. Blowick

Deputy Blaney will not have the Rules of Order of this House to protect him. He cannot shield himself behind them in Donegal.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy will now come to the Local Authorities (Works) Act.

Mr. Blowick

That Act was brought into operation as a result of the land rehabilitation scheme. It was felt that scheme would be held up to some extent and, while excellent work was being done under the Arterial Drainage Act, it was slow in operation. It was felt that while some areas would benefit, other areas would lose. The land rehabilitation scheme would have to follow more or less in the wake of the arterial drainage. We were informed by high officials in quite a few Government Departments that they estimated there were between 4,000,000 and 4,500,000 acres of quite good land which was useless for food production because it was either subjected to periodic flooding or permanently water-logged. It was in order to get the two schemes working simultaneously that the Local Authorities (Works) Act was brought into operation. When it was under way £1,900,000 was given to 27 county councils for work under that Act. The following year we gave the same amount. That has now been cut down deliberately and no amount of bluffing by the Minister for Finance will convince me to the contrary.

The present Government has none of the difficulties to contend with that faced the inter-Party Government in the land rehabilitation scheme. We are not now going around spreading the rumour that the present Government is trying to use that scheme in order to increase the valuation of land all over the country. That is what the present Government did when it was in opposition during the time the Act waspassing through the House and for some time after its passage.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

There is nothing in the motion about the land rehabilitation scheme.

Mr. Blowick

The Government is getting every assistance now. Despite that, both these schemes are being cut down. Tourist roads are getting priority from the Minister. The Local Authorities (Works) Act was deliberately savaged this year in order to divert the money to some other purpose. I want to bring home to the Minister my view of that transaction.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Roads do not arise under this and the Deputy cannot, of course, discuss the administration of the whole Department on this motion.

Mr. Blowick

I have no desire to stray from the motion. I find that the grant has been ruthlessly savaged. New grants have been introduced in some cases and others have been increased. I cannot help but think the Minister for Local Government has deliberately savaged the money underthis sub-head in order to increase other sub-heads.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That would be more relevant on the main Estimate.

Mr. Blowick

I agree I will have more scope on the main Estimate.

Mr. Blaney

On a point of order. For the information of the House, what is the explanation of a scheme being savaged?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That is not a point of order.

Mr. D.J. O'Sullivan

It is the same thing that was attempted on Deputy Blowick when he was Minister during a by-election down in Burt. Deputy Blaney will recall the episode.

Mr. Blowick

I will explain the position to the voters in Donegal at a future date.

Debate adjourned.

The Dáil adjourned at 11.30 p.m. until 2 p.m. on Thursday, 12th March, 1953.