asked the Minister for Local Government whether a tar-mixing depot was recently erected by the Mayo County Council; if he gave, or was asked to give, prior sanction to expenditure on this project; if he was asked, whether he gave such sanction; whether the depot is now completed and functioning; and if it is not functioning, why not; and if he will state the cost of its erection and of any subsequent legal proceedings in connection therewith, and the nature of such proceedings.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Mayo Tar-mixing Depot.
44.
I have no information regarding the recent erection of a tar-mixing depot. In February, 1954, the county council submitted a proposal for the purchase of four storage tanks and a number of other machinery items. They were informed that no objection in principle was seen to the proposal. Final approval to the purchase issued on the 1st February, 1955, and the raising of a loan for the purpose was sanctioned on the 11th August, 1955. The subsequent steps for the acquisition and erection of the storage tanks are matters for the local authority, subject to review by the Local Government Auditor, and no proposals or reports on these matters have been submitted to my Department.
Is the Minister not aware that a considerable sum of money was spent by the local authority on a site at Castlebar for this purpose and that before the local authority embarked on the erection of these tanks or tar-mixing depot, or whatever you like to call it, notice was given to them by a resident that he would take the appropriate action on the basis of obnoxious smells and interference with the amenities of his house generally; that, in spite of that notice, the work proceeded, the money was spent, the depot was completed and, simultaneously with the work going on, the pleadings in a legal action taken by the owner of adjoining premises were also completed; that the matter reached finality as far as the law was concerned, that two days were set aside by the Circuit Court judge for the hearing——
The Deputy seems to be giving information.
I am asking the Minister does he not know what I know, and I am telling him that to remind him.
The Deputy should put a question. He is giving information to the Minister and that is contrary to the procedure at Question Time.
I have put a question relating to the subsequent legal proceedings and the nature of such proceedings, and have stated that, at the very end when the case was about to be heard, the county council gave in their guns, agreed to an injunction to remove all of the buildings and plant elsewhere and to pay the sum, according to my information, of between £300 and £400 in costs to the successful plaintiff. I want to ask if, in the face of all that, the Minister will not make further inquiries into the matter to satisfy himself that this is not a flagrant misuse of public moneys.