In the case of Gaeltacht schemes carried out by the Special Employment Schemes Office on behalf of the Department of the Gaeltacht and in some rural employment schemes in that area, where substantial contributions have been collected, it is desirable to do a good finishing job on these roads so that they will be put into good order and condition to enable the county council to take them over and maintain them. It is quite true that in a number of these cases, the engineers of the Special Employment Schemes Office have found it necessary to haul gravel long distances. If the Deputy will let me know where we can get as good type of gravel and sand nearer, I will be very happy to see that we draw from that pit.
The bulk of the money used in reconstructing the roads to a final finish is invariably spent in the immediate locality where materials of a suitable type are easily available. In the case of the minor employment schemes, the limited money available in many instances does not permit the Special Employment Schemes Office to do a very good job. Where the beneficiaries desire a better standard job undertaken, the rural employment scheme is available to them for a relatively small contribution.
A number of Deputies raised the question of the odd difficult farmer who refuses to sign the consent form. I referred to this problem in my remarks last night. Where this Office repair existing roads to their present width and where there is no widening or other serious interference with a man's property, this Office are prepared to go ahead, notwithstanding the fact that one difficult man refuses to give his consent to the proposal. However, where widening is involved which would cause serious interference to a man's property, we would be open to a charge of trespass if we proceeded without the consent of the owner of the property. Generally speaking, only about one per cent. of the cases dealt with under minor employment, bog development and rural improvement schemes create this kind of problem. In many cases, the local clergyman and other influential people have succeeded in getting the objections withdrawn. It is not too common a complaint. We try to effect an amicable settlement in most instances.
With regard to the taking over of schemes by county councils, nearly everyone who contributed to the debate referred to the rural improvement schemes for which, as I indicated in my opening remarks, a provision of £225,000 was made—an increase of £25,000 on last year's Estimate. Most Deputies referred to the desirability of county councils taking over these roads when completed under the rural improvement schemes.
Deputy Donegan referred to a figure of £210,000 for County Louth which was the amount of money required to bring all the accommodation roads in Louth up to a standard which would enable the county council to maintain them subsequently. The Local Government Act of 1953 enables county councils to take over for maintenance any road of public utility. It was never envisaged under that Act that the State would provide the funds necessary to bring these roads up to county council standards. Deputies who were then in the House will recall the clear case made in respect of that Bill that all the county councils wanted was the power to take over the roads and they would provide the money, not all the money. The sum of £210,000 was the estimated full cost of bringing the roads in a small county like Louth to a proper standard. Meath County Council has gone a long way towards providing the necessary funds. Meath, as we know, is one of the richest counties in the country.