asked the Taoiseach what steps are contemplated to set the building industry going, as promised in his statement to Press representatives on 8th March last.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Building Industry and Unemployment in Dublin.
asked the Taoiseach if he is aware of the widespread disappointment at the continued failure of the Government to announce plans for the immediate relief of the heavy unemployment in Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to answer Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
The Deputy may be assured that the Government are fully as anxious as anyone can be to reduce the present high level of unemployment—and that, as I said in reply to a question by the Deputy on the 1st May, not in Dublin merely, but in the State as a whole.
As I pointed out on the same occasion, the only schemes of real advantage are those which would develop the economy, increase the opportunities of continuous employment or create assets of lasting value. It was on this principle that the Budget was framed, that is, to ensure that the capital resources available would be used for national development, so that employment on works of permanent value would be maintained and increased. The relaxations of the special import levies where a process of manufacture is involved, the new tax incentives assured to industry and the provisions made in the Budget to encourage production, particularly for export, are all directed towards the same end and will, the Government expect, have a significant effect in increasing production and lasting employment.
It would be unreasonable, however, to expect that Government policy could have been effective to deal with this complex problem in the short period since we assumed office, two months ago. The Deputy will remember that, at that time, the numbers of registered unemployed were 85,815 in the State as a whole and 19,349 in Dublin—16,400 and 5,500, respectively, more than on the corresponding dates in 1956. The latest available figures, those for the 11th May, are 74,511 for the State as a whole and 17,112 for Dublin, and it remains true that, as I said on the 1st May, the seasonal reduction in the figures is, this year, relatively rapid.
It should also be remembered that, when we assumed office, we were faced with the serious financial difficulties which were explained by the Minister for Finance, in his Budget statement, on the 8th May.
We have been giving the most earnest consideration to possible measures to improve the situation, and that consideration is still proceeding. Already we have decided on certain interim steps.
The first of these was to remove the uncertainty and confusion that existed in regard to the commitments of local authorities for housing and other services and to provide funds to enable these commitments to be met. This step has been taken.
Next, we are about to make good a promise made by the last Government by introducing a Bill, which they had in course of preparation, to amend the definition of the market value of a house for the purposes of the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Acts, so as to remove the restrictive effect of the existing definition and to cover the proper and reasonable cost of a house.
The Government have further decided, in principle, that the income limits affecting eligibility for loans under the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Acts should be raised. The Minister for Local Government is giving urgent attention to this matter, with a view to the determination of the appropriate higher limits.
The Government are also examining the position regarding school-building —including the building of vocational schools in Dublin—and other public construction projects.
While all this is being done, it must be stressed that full regard must be had to the limited amount of the available resources and that we cannot, for a moment, lose sight of the danger of fresh balance of payments difficulties, with the shortage of credit and even greater unemployment which might result if our external reserves were further reduced to any serious extent.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary state whether he is yet in a position to say whether the Government have decided on how the £250,000 for the immediate alleviation of the heavy unemployment is to be allocated? Has any decision been made with regard to the expenditure of that £250,000?
I am afraid the Deputy will have to address that question to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance.