Vol. 226 No. 2
I move:
That a sum not exceeding £8,234,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1967, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of Public Works; for expenditure in respect of Public Buildings; for the Maintenance of certain Parks and Public Works; and for the Execution and Maintenance of Drainage and other Engineering Works.
Sa dhá bhliain atá caite, a Cheann Comhairle, tógadh an Vóta do Oibreacha agus Foirgnimh Phoiblí agus an Vóta do Scéimeanna Fostaíochta agus Éigeandála d'aon iarraidh amháin agus, le do thoil féin, déanfad mar an gcéanna i mbliana.
Mar a léiríonn Leabhar na Meastachán, tá laghdú i mbliana in airgead an Vóta do Oibreacha agus Foirgnimh Phoiblí. Is feasach do na Teachtaí faoi láthair a riachtanaí atá sé smacht dian a choimeád ar chaiteachas an Stáit. Dá bhrí sin, ba ghá dhúinn roinnt scéimeanna a chur ar athló agus ní bheimíd i ndán cuid eile a chur i bhfeidhm chomh mear agus ba mhaith linn. Deineadh machnamh mion sar ar deineadh an laghdú i Vota a 8. Ocht milliúin dhá chéad tríocha is ceithre mhíle punt an t-iomlán is féidir a chur ar fáil dos na seirbhísí fén Vóta.
Is féidir saothar Oifig na nOibreacha Poiblí a roinnt ina dhá chuid mhóra— seirbhísí ailtireachta agus seirbhísí innealtóireachta. Tabharfaidh mé cúntas ar an dá sheirbhís san ar dtús.
After the last war the Government determined to overtake the arrears of primary school building that had accumulated over half a century. They set a target of 100 new schools a year as well as 20 to 40 major improvement schemes. These numbers were not easily attainable. An increasingly large number of new schools was erected each succeeding year until last year when the targets were well exceeded. In that year 130 new schools were completed and major schemes of improvement were carried out at 66 schools. That gave a total of 196 modern buildings for the year. To illustrate the significance of this achievement I may mention that taking some previous years at random the number of new schools finished in 1956-57 was 64, in 1961-62 it was 81 and in 1964-65 it was 96. Since 1st April, 1950 over 1,100 new schools were built. That is nearly a quarter of the total number of primary schools in the State.
Deputies know that the Government intends to replace a number of one- and two-room schools with larger central schools. Apart from obvious educational advantages these central schools will have amenities which could not be provided in small schools. A fitted kitchen will enable light meals to be prepared for the pupils. A larger general purpose room will serve as a luncheon room. It will be equipped for use also as a library, assembly hall and for general recreation purposes. This will be a big improvement on existing conditions. Most of the old schools were draughty and badly lighted. Many were inadequately heated, had no proper play space and only poor sanitary facilities.
Our primary schools provide for almost half a million pupils. Last year 20,000 permanent pupil places were provided. I have not the figures for earlier years, but in the five year period since the 1st April, 1961, 77,000 places have been provided. This means that nearly one sixth of the pupils were catered for in new buildings in the five year period. I hope to have this satisfactory progress maintained. There will naturally be a reduction in the number of new schools but not in the total accommodation we will provide.
Urgent needs for schools have sometimes been met by pre-fabricated timber classrooms. They can be delivered, assembled and erected in a few days and they give satisfactory accommodation. They are durable and can be transferred elsewhere when no longer needed. Last year they were used to provide accommodation for 5,000 pupils in addition to the 20,000 permanent pupil places which I have mentioned.
We spent from State funds £3,123,000 on primary school building last year. The year before we spent £2,929,000 and in 1963-64 £2,326,000. The £2 million mark was never reached before 1963-64. As Deputies will see from item No. 27 of the List of Works included in Subhead E, I am asking for £2,760,000 for schools for the current year. This, despite the financial difficulties, is the third largest sum ever to be voted for the service in any year.
I now turn to our other architectural activities. Besides the sum of £2,760,000 for national schools, Subhead E provides for the erection and improvement of buildings for the Oireachtas and Government Departments and for development work at a number of harbours. I shall refer specifically only to the more important of these works or to others in which Deputies may have a special interest.
Last year a number of works of major importance was completed. In Wexford we have new Government offices which provide accommodation for the staffs of the Department of Social Welfare and the Revenue Commissioners as well as an automatic telephone exchange. The Garden of Remembrance at Parnell Square was officially opened on Easter Monday. The sculptural feature has still to be added. This will not be completed for another three years or so. A new Post Office and telephone exchange were erected at Youghal; four new customs posts were provided at Culloville and Inishammon, County Monaghan, Kilslean, County Donegal and Aghalane Bridge, County Cavan. New buildings at Athenry and Clonakilty agricultural colleges and a veterinary field station at Abbotstown Farm were completed. The temporary car ferry terminal at Dún Laoghaire was ready in good time for the opening of the ferry service in July, 1965; this was an engineering work provided for under Subhead E.
Work is going on well on the reconstruction of the drawingroom block at Dublin Castle. Progress with the extension of the National Gallery is also satisfactory and the job should be finished by the summer of 1968.
The work of extending and improving the accommodation at Leinster House is now in its final stages. The five office floors in the new extension have been completed and occupied since June. The new corridor linking the first floor of the extension with the landing outside the Dáil Chamber has now been completed. Work on the new kitchens and restaurants is also nearing completion and arrangements are in hands for the supply of the necessary furniture and equipment. We should be able to put the new restaurants into use after Christmas.
A total of £215,000 is being provided for new Garda stations and houses for married members of the Force and for improvements at existing stations throughout the country. Information about new stations is given in the Appendix to the List of Works.
I am asking for £313,500 for works for the Department of Agriculture. A new radiography unit, an improved operating theatre and an extension of the main buildings to give additional teaching facilities are to be provided at the Veterinary College, Ballsbridge; various improvements are being carried out at Abbotstown Farm and at the three agricultural colleges, Athenry, Ballyhaise and Clonakilty. The pig progeny testing station at the Munster Institute is now completed. Provision is included for regional veterinary and dairy produce laboratories. The veterinary laboratories will be at Cork, Limerick, Athlone and Sligo and the dairy produce laboratories at Cork and Limerick. Work on the laboratory at Sligo is nearing completion.
The major fishery harbour schemes at Dunmore East, Killybegs and Castletownbere are developing more slowly than I would have wished. As I mentioned last year, difficulties about the acquisition of sites at Dunmore East and Killybegs are delaying these schemes. We have to ask for additional powers to enable us to deal with the difficulties. Whilst the temporary car ferry terminal at Dún Laoghaire has worked well so far it is apparent that the increase in traffic will call for greater facilities than can be provided at that site. Work on a larger terminal has begun. The major portion of the job is a new pier which is being built by contract. We hope the entire work will be finished in 1968.
A sum of £280,000 is provided for the works for the Department of Posts and Telegraphs: £173,000 is needed for the new Central Sorting Office at Sheriff Street, Dublin and £70,000 for a new warehouse and other accommodation for the Post Office Stores at St. John's Road, Dublin. The sorting office ought to be in operation early in 1967, and the St. John's Road premises soon afterwards. The erection of a new post office and offices for other Government staffs in Carlow has begun.
Arterial drainage moneys are provided in the G group of subheads. G.2, the cost of construction works, and G.4, the cost of maintaining completed schemes, are by far the most substantial of the group.
The provision for G.2—Construction Works—is smaller than last year's but it will enable progress to be maintained on the three major schemes, the Inny, the Moy and the Deel, and on the one minor scheme, the Killimor, already in progress. I hope to start before the end of the year on the scheme which has been designed for the Corrib-Headford portion of the Corrib. This scheme will cost nearly a million pounds. It will benefit about 14,000 acres of agricultural land and more than 5,000 acres of bog.
Operations are continuing on the Shannon embankments and in the Swilly estuary.
The intermediate river works already in hands will be completed, but I do not intend to divert funds and resources from works on catchments included in the published priority lists for the purpose of starting new schemes on embankments or intermediate rivers. I know the need for drainage in the areas affected by the smaller rivers, but we can make the best use of the available funds, staff and machinery and more quickly resolve the national drainage problem by giving all our attention at present to the listed catchments.
The "Additional Minor Schemes", for the completion of which provision is made, are the Brickey in County Waterford and the Abbey in County Donegal. There will also be contract payments on schemes which were completed last year on the Duff in Counties Sligo and Leitrim and the Matt in County Dublin.
The maintenance provision under Subhead G.4 amounts to £150,000. It will continue to increase each year as drainage schemes are completed and more and more of them come to be maintained.
Eight major catchments are being surveyed or designed. They are the Maigue, Boyne, Corrib-Mask, Erne, Suir, Mulkear, Boyle and Owenmore. Two minor catchments, the Bonet and Dunkellin, are at the same stage.
I hope, within months, to have the design for the Maigue and the Boyne ready. The design for the Erne will follow soon after. If these schemes are found to be economic, the usual requirements of the Arterial Drainage Act, which include local exhibition and consideration of the observations of parties concerned, will have to be complied with before the schemes can be confirmed and works commenced. I expect work on the Maigue and the Boyne to start in 1968.
The White Paper on Public Capital Expenditure, before the House in the autumn, 1965, indicated that adjustments in the capital programme would be necessary so that priority can be given to projects immediately productive. One project which has had to be postponed is the further investigation of the Shannon catchment and the preparation of an arterial drainage scheme. When I referred to the Shannon survey programme last year, I intended that it should commence then. Some staff was diverted to the Shannon from other projects, but change in financial circumstances made it impossible to continue. The Shannon investigations will proceed as soon as funds are available.
In October, 1965, I visited Belfast and had discussions with the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture at Stormont about matters of mutual concern, mainly cross-Border drainage. The meeting was followed by further discussions between civil servants. As a result of these discussions, investigations of two joint projects have been commenced this year, namely, the drainage of the Kilcoo in Counties Leitrim and Fermanagh and of the Finn in Monaghan and Fermanagh. A scheme for the catchment of the Burnfoot and Skeoge rivers, County Donegal, is in contemplation. It would have the incidental result of relieving conditions on the other side of the Border, around Derry city.
The F Subheads provide for the cost of the upkeep of State premises and property.
Subhead F.1 includes the maintenance of parks. I should like to say a few words about the Bourn Vincent Memorial Park, at Killarney. I think much more can be done to develop further this national park and major tourist attraction. The work of opening up views, providing car parks, replanting, and improving the rock gardens and pleasure grounds is going ahead, but there is need for better planning for development. Some time ago I set up a committee representative of the various bodies interested in the park for the purpose of co-ordinating activities and helping in the formulation of a long-term development plan. I have also arranged with An Foras Forbartha for the employment of a consultant to carry out a survey of the scenic, historic, scientific and tourist values of the Killarney Valley and particularly of the national park. An interim report by the consultant has just been received and is being considered. In this way, I hope to ensure that improvements within the park will be carried out in harmony with the general development of the Killarney area.
A flock of black-faced mountain sheep has been kept in the park for many years and in 1954 facilities were given to An Foras Talúntais to carry out research into the improvement of mountain sheep and hill grazing. The programme turned out to be more extensive than had been expected originally. On reviewing the detailed proposals, I decided that a national park was not an appropriate place for carrying through an agricultural research programme on the scale suggested. Also, it is highly desirable that the Commissioners of Public Works should have sole responsibility for agricultural activity in the park. In addition, tourism is of prime importance in the Killarney area and wrong policy decisions in the national park could do much harm to the tourist industry. I have, therefore, asked An Foras Talúntais to taper off their programme and they have agreed.
Two species of deer live in the park, native red deer and Japanese sika. The red deer are unique in the sense that they are generally recognised as being the only herd of this species in the country which is descended from indigenous wild stock. Particular attention is being paid to the welfare of both species of deer in the park.
The Forestry Division of the Department of Lands are using portions of the park for afforestation purposes. They have constructed a number of roads to give access to the forest areas. These roads could not be used generally in the earlier stages of forest work, but the time has come to throw most of them open and give the public the opportunity of visiting the more remote parts of the Park. The clearing and opening up of areas and the signposting of roads, walks, viewpoints, climbing routes, etc., will be continued.
I should like to refer also to the Phoenix Park here in Dublin. The number of motorists going there on Sundays and during holidays is increasing year by year and something of a problem is arising. Hundreds are parking and picknicking on the grass, despite warning notices. At some places considerable damage has been done to the sward. The Commissioners will try to meet requirements by providing car parks at suitable centres.
The provision under subhead F.3 for rents, rates, etc., on State occupied premises is £425,000, which is £85,000 greater than last year's figure. The increase results from the need to lease accommodation in Dublin for the staffs of various Government Departments. Since 1922, many new services have been established by the Government and others have been greatly extended. Accommodation for these services has been inadequate. Only a small number of purpose planned buildings has been provided. The Office of Public Works has had to rent or buy old buildings, few of which were designed to be used as offices. The supply of old buildings is, of course, limited and many of those which were acquired decades ago are no longer usable. They do not conform to the statutory standards of office requirements and overcrowding of staffs is too common.
Another undesirable feature is the dispersal of the staffs of single departments over several different buildings. Virtually every Department suffers from this handicap. The staffs of two of the most important Departments, Finance and Agriculture, are scattered over no fewer than 16 different buildings throughout Dublin. Anyone giving the matter a serious thought will realise that such a situation is bad from every point of view and that the sooner it is remedied the better. Proper accommodation is an essential prerequisite of efficient administration.
During the past year or two the Office of Public Works has rented space in a number of the modern office blocks recently erected in Dublin. They include the Cómhlucht Siúicre Éireann building in Earlsfort Terrace, O'Connell Bridge House, the Rank Building in Hawkins Street, Liberty Hall and Ansley House in Mespil Road. The average annual rent we have to pay for this space is about 17/4d per square foot. In relation to current costs, this is at least as favourable as the rate paid by many business concerns in the city for similar facilities.
The alternative to the renting of space in new buildings would be that the State would design and erect its own buildings. While that would undoubtedly be the ideal solution of our accommodation problem the amount of capital required to carry through such a programme would be enormous. In recent and present circumstances it could be made available only at the expense of vital services. Clearly, then, the only practical solution to the problem, though not, as I have indicated, the ideal one, lies in the renting of space in modern office blocks constructed by private enterprise.
The provision of £5,000 in Subhead I is to meet the cost of maintenance of the coast protection works completed last year at Rosslare Strand, County Wexford. The Coast Protection Act, 1963, provides that maintenance will be carried out by the Commissioners of Public Works and the cost recovered from the county council. We have received proposals for works under that Act for some forty areas. Preliminary examinations have been made in six cases and reports have been furnished to the county councils concerned. In present financial circumstances it has been found necessary to defer further consideration of coast protection proposals in favour of more productive works.
The provision for the National Monuments Service is the same as last year. I should have liked this figure to be increased, but that cannot be done at present. A good deal of useful work will be done for £60,000.
The example given by the Kilkenny Archaeological Society and by Father Egan of Ballintubber has excited increasing interest in our monuments. One of the consequences of this is increasing pressure on the Commissioners to take further monuments into their charge. There is little if any advantage in the acceptance of responsibility for any monument until maintenance and preservation works can be guaranteed. Work on monuments calls for a high degree of skill and care and workmen and supervisors must be specially trained. The number of these skilled and trained men available at present is very small. Deputies know that a co-ordinating committee now exists on which the Departments and other bodies concerned with national monuments are represented. Urgent works to prevent deterioration will continue to be carried out by the Commissioners on their own initiative. I need hardly say that the Commissioners cannot spend money on any monument unless it is owned by the State or is in its guardianship.
Improvements have been carried out in the precincts of the Pearse Cottage, Rosmuc, and the cottage has been refurnished as closely as possible to what it was in Pearse's day. A scheme to improve the amenities is being worked out by An Bord Fáilte. The restoration of Rothe House, undertaken by the National Monuments Branch for the Kilkenny Archaeological Society and Bord Fáilte has been completed: I must pay a tribute to the members of that Society not only for their initiative about Rothe House but also for their keen interest in monuments generally and their energy and devotion in carrying on the best traditions of the oldest archaeological society in the country.
I must also pay a tribute to Father Egan, whose abilities have already been publicly acclaimed, and compliment him on his good taste and wonderful perseverance in seeing that the church at Ballintubber Abbey was restored. The work was carried out by the National Monuments Branch of the Office of Public Works on behalf of Father Egan, and at his expense. The 750th anniversary of the foundation of the Abbey in 1216 was celebrated and 8th September, 1966. The interior of the church was planned to conform with the new Liturgy and Mass was celebrated for the first time at the new High Altar in the presence of An tUachtarán and high dignitaries of Church and State.
The ruins of the cloister and monastic buildings are in the guardianship of the Commissioners since 1962. Repair and preservation works to these have been virtually completed. Conservation work at Derrynane Abbey is progressing satisfactorily. Conservation of a number of other monuments such as Kilcooly Abbey near Urlingford; Cahir Castle, County Tipperary; Kells Priory, County Kilkenny; and Liscarroll Castle, County Cork is going ahead.
Work has also begun in County Louth on the field stage of the archaeological survey of the country. It is planned to make a detailed, systematic, county-by-county survey. Aerial photography will play an important part in locating and identifying remains and the Air Corps is co-operating fully in this very important enterprise.
Hear, hear.
In addition to the main Estimate for Employment and Emergency Schemes—Vote 9— amounting to £465,000 net, a Supplementary Estimate of £50,000 is being introduced to bring the net total of the Vote to £515,000. Appropriations-in-aid, estimated at £42,000, will permit a gross expenditure of £557,000, a reduction of about £362,000 compared with the amount expended in 1965-66.
The reduced provision was an unavoidable consequence of the financial stringency in the current year, and the necessity for making increased provision for services more essential to the development of the economy, including agriculture, education, health and social welfare.
In deciding the amount of each Estimate for the current year, the Government were guided by three main principles: the limitation of the provision to the minimum amount required to cover the cost of committed expenditure; the reduction of expenditure where the consequences on economic development would be minimal; and the avoidance of commitments on new services involving substantial cost. The reduced provision for Employment and Emergency Schemes reflects the application of these principles.
Of the gross sum of £557,000, the administrative subheads require £100,000. A provision of £181,000, which includes the Supplementary Estimate of £50,000, is proposed for urban employment schemes; £250,000 for the rural improvements scheme; and £15,000 for miscellaneous schemes, mainly minor marine works. The provisions for rural employment schemes in the non-urbanised towns (Subhead E), for minor employment schemes (Subhead F), and for bog development schemes (Subhead G) have been limited to the amounts required to pay outstanding grants on works sanctioned in previous years, and no new grants are being allocated under these Subheads this year.
The cost of salaries and wages, travelling expenses, and other administrative charges, if based on last year's establishment, would have exceeded £150,000. The provision was reduced to £100,000 to accord with the reduced scale of operations in the current year. This entailed a reorganisation of the Office, in the course of which a total of 30 permanent staff, including nine engineers and two supervisors, have been transferred to other Departments.
An allocation of £160,000 has been made for employment schemes grants in the urban areas, comprising the four County Boroughs of Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Waterford, the Borough of Dún Laoghaire, and 55 other urban districts. The local authorities concerned are contributing a further £31,870 towards the cost of these schemes, making a total of £191,870.
Some 731 schemes amounting to £233,117 have been approved to date this year under the rural improvements scheme subhead, of which 554, amounting to £190,587, or 82 per cent are for road works and 177 amounting to £42,530 or 18 per cent are for drainage works. As there is still a backlog of applications under this scheme, it has not yet been possible to resume the acceptance of new applications.
Deputies are already aware that because of the reduced provision this year it was decided to make no new grants under the minor employment schemes or bog development schemes subheads, but instead to merge these schemes in the contributory rural improvements scheme. The three schemes have always been complementary in the sense that they catered for the same types of work—accommodation and bog roads and minor drainage. The change was necessary to ensure that the available funds would be used to the best advantage, for the most needed works, and to reduce administrative costs. To facilitate the transition to the combined scheme, applicants for grants in former minor employment and bog development schemes areas have been given the opportunity of making immediate applications under the rural improvements scheme.
Deputies will also be aware that the future arrangements for the administration of the various schemes financed from the employment and emergency schemes Vote have been under review for some time. I regret that I am yet unable to announce the decision of the Government on this matter, but I can assure the House that it will not be long delayed.
I now submit these two Estimates for the consideration of the House. If any Deputy requires further information on any matter, I will do my best to satisfy him.
I move:
That the Vote be referred back for reconsideration.
The reduction which has been announced by the Parliamentary Secretary in respect of employment and emergency schemes, which are contained in the Estimates this year, is quite considerable. In fact, that was the reason the motion to refer back the Vote, in the name of Deputy Harte, was put down; it was put down because of the concern we felt at the reduction in the Estimate.
The House is aware of the increase in the numbers of unemployed and of the need to provide schemes of value as well as schemes which will provide employment in rural and in urban areas. The recent change in the manner of compiling persons on the unemployment register and the alteration in the method of calculating the numbers of unemployed, camouflages to some extent the real facts. But, even allowing for the changes, it is obvious that there has this year been quite a noticeable increase.
I should like to hear from the Parliamentary Secretary about the method it is proposed to adopt to initiate and undertake new schemes. As the situation has developed, a great many applicants have found, on making application to the Office of Public Works, that their applications could not be considered because of inability to provide sufficient funds to undertake this scheme. One problem which has presented itself for many of these applicants is whether it will be necessary for them to re-apply or make fresh applications, or, alternatively, whether the mere fact that an application has been lodged will mean that when the employment and emergency schemes office is in a position to undertake fresh work, the Office of Public Works will reactivate these applications. That is a matter which should be clarified in respect of the applicants concerned.
There is no doubt that a great many schemes, individual schemes and schemes carried out in respect of groups, have proved of considerable benefit to the persons concerned. There is no alternative system readily available whereby certain work of this character can be undertaken. One defect in the present system is that only limited provision is available for individual applicants where other beneficiaries would not benefit by them.
In this case I feel that some special consideration should be given to the position of individual applications. So far as the schemes generally are concerned, I gather from the Parliamentary Secretary's remarks that it is proposed to amalgamate and alter some of these schemes generally, so as to cover the different types. In that connection, the extent to which work can be carried on in urban areas greatly depends on the contributions made available by local authorities. One of the problems that affect urban areas, particularly where large-scale building development has taken place, is the recurrent problem of flooding. This applies in particular to certain areas with which I am personally familiar. The recurrent difficulties which have been created for residents in these areas, if not primarily caused by development, have certainly been aggravated by it.
In the South County Dublin area, including portion of the Dún Laoghaire — Rathdown district, very considerable housing development has taken place. Because of the nature of the terrain and the fact that the area is at a level considerably lower than the adjacent mountain area, the flow of water, particularly after heavy rainfall, becomes channelled into it. Prior to this building development and the large-scale road construction which has been undertaken, the problem was rarely of consequence or affected only isolated houses or, possibly, groups of houses. With the housing and new road development that has taken place, the roads in many cases have acted as channels through which the surface water is carried. To the residents and to a non-technical person visiting the area on the occasion of flooding and heavy rainfall, it would appear that the constructional work undertaken by developers and builders, and in some cases by the local authorities, did not adequately take into account the extent to which the development work might contribute, and in some cases did contribute, to flooding.
While, initially, the authorities concerned might be pardoned for the situation, there is no doubt that a remedy is necessary now in a number of areas. Certain work has been carried out. A large-scale drainage scheme was undertaken by Dún Laoghaire Corporation and Dublin County Council which has provided a remedy to a certain extent for some of the problems, in addition to providing sewerage facilities for further building development.
On the other hand, there are still places where on the occasion of heavy rainfall great problems arise. I have in mind particularly the situation at Stradbrook in Blackrock, which is on the border of the Dún Laoghaire Corporation and the county council area and, to that extent, there is possibly joint responsibility. There is also a certain amount of flooding in Stillorgan. I mention these places because I feel that the Office of Public Works and the local authorities concerned should discuss the matter jointly so as to ensure that whatever schemes are undertaken will provide for a solution of the difficulties which in the case of some residents have been repetitive.
The Parliamentary Secretary referred in his introductory statement to the school building programme and to the fact that substantial sums were spent in the last financial year and he made certain comparisons. While the figures are impressive, in presenting figures of this character it is not sufficiently realised the extent to which building costs have risen in recent years. Even this year, the figure has been given, and I do not think it has been challenged, of the effect of the wholesale tax. That tax applies only to certain components used in building. A number of items used in building are excluded from the turnover tax and from the wholesale tax. It has been estimated that the wholesale tax and the alterations that have taken place in wage and salary levels have increased building costs this year by anything between seven and eight per cent. The fact is that in recent years building costs have risen very considerably. Although more money was spent last year and, as compared with other years, the expenditure has shown an upward trend, the fact is that costs also have increased substantially.
However, the particular problem to which I want to direct attention is one that is largely peculiar, certainly in extent, to urban and semi-urban areas. I often think that the school building problem as it affects Dún Laoghaire and other urban areas, but particularly as it affects the Dublin area, is so great that a different system of financing school building there might be considered from that which operates in other parts of the country. The growth of population in Dublin and the Dublin area is primarily a problem for the urban environs rather than the city areas mentioned here yesterday. There are certain parts of the central Dublin city area where the school-going population has declined because of the movement of population to other areas. It may be that in time, with rebuilding, that trend will be reversed or that the former population will be restored. But, in my constituency, the rapid growth of housing schemes over a number of years under the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Act procedures and the development of new areas has meant very acute problems of school accommodation and the delays involved in getting new schools erected and under way have created, and are in many cases creating, very acute difficulties for pupils, parents and teachers as well as for the authorities responsible for the running and directing of schools.
I have long felt that the method of financing school building, as well as the technical procedures adopted to deal with this situation, while they may be adequate or reasonable in the less congested areas, that in certain parts of the Dublin area—taking that as a general description covering the whole city and particularly the suburbs and Dún Laoghaire and such places— this is a problem which might well merit investigation to see if it is possible to evolve a different type of scheme from that which is applied elsewhere.
Reference was made by the Parliamentary Secretary to the erection of prefab schools. Many school authorities have found that system quite satisfactory. In fact without it, in a number of cases, it would have been impossible with the time factor involved and the very acute problems created by an increase in the numbers of school-going children, to deal with the situation. But while this may alleviate the problem for a time and provide some form of accommodation to deal with it in places like the Dublin city area, Dún Laoghaire and adjoining areas where the size of classes in many schools is far too large, it is obvious that in many cases the need for permanent accommodation will continue. While I understand that the responsibility of the Office of Public Works extends only to the provision of schools, the Department of Education and the Office of Public Works should direct their combined efforts towards reaching a speedy and satisfactory conclusion to this problem.
The Parliamentary Secretary referred to the development at Dún Laoghaire Pier and the ferry service. That particular development has proceeded quite satisfactorily and the extent to which it has made a contribution to the tourist trade, both for the area immediately concerned and for the country generally, is recognised by those interested and concerned with it. There are, however, certain aspects of the work which have not yet been completed and which have caused and are causing consequential problems for Dún Laoghaire residents.
One of these is in connection with the bus services. It is understood that a permanent terminal will be provided, if certain works are carried out by the Office of Public Works in consultation and collaboration with Dún Laoghaire Corporation. I should be glad if that work could be expedited because the provision of certain facilities would ensure that it would be possible to provide a service for people who wish to avail of what was the recognised stopping place on the Marine Road and would not merely facilitate users but would also facilitate business in the area.
The Parliamentary Secretary referred to the work on historic monuments. I should like to express appreciation of a great deal of work which has been done by the Office of Public Works in this regard. I believe that the monuments which have been repaired, renovated and, in some cases, very nearly discovered as a result of the work of the Office of Public Works have great value from an historical point of view as well as from the point of view of tourists. I have in mind particular places which I had the opportunity of visiting such as Clonmacnoise and two places in the Parliamentary Secretary's constituency, Jerpoint Abbey and Rothe House, to which he referred. One advantage of a place like Jerpoint Abbey is that it is easily accessible from the road and certainly the renovation and restoration work carried out by the officers and officials of the Parliamentary Secretary's Department is of the very highest standard.
I was greatly impressed by the work carried out at Ballintubber Abbey. Needless to say, a great deal of the credit, and in fact, most of it, must go to Father Egan and the other helpers he had there. There was one aspect of that work which I thought was a bit out of tune with the rest of the work carried out there. That was the idea to snowcem or whitewash the inside of the Abbey. It seemed to me, and I heard other people express the same view, that if the stonework were left untouched, it would have been much easier for people to appreciate and understand it. For some reason, the inside was treated with some substance—snowcem, or indeed it might even be regarded as whitewash—and it certainly seemed to me not to be in keeping with the rest of the work carried out.
There are two matters that I want to refer to in this connection. The first is that there is a difference—and I think very often people do not appreciate this—between preserving and maintaining historical monuments and the attempts on occasion to renovate, restore or maintain old buildings. I believe this is a case in which the Office of Public Works should investigate most carefully whether it will be possible, by a reasonable amount of expenditure, to maintain or restore an old building.
I have in mind two cases. One case which certainly caused the Office of Public Works and the Department of Agriculture a great deal of trouble was Johnstown Castle because of a proviso in the deed of trust handing that particular property over to the State that there was an obligation on the State to maintain it. Undoubtedly the expenditure subsequently involved exceeded its value.
The other case I have in mind is the old Royal Hospital at Kilmainham. In that connection I commend most strongly the idea of establishing a folklore museum. One of the criticisms that may be levelled against the State here is that we have not shown sufficient initiative or enthusiasm in matters of this sort. There is no doubt that there is a wealth of historical material of great value preserved in the Folklore Commission in most unsuitable surroundings and, it is well known, in great danger from a physical point of view in the sense that these buildings are not suitable and hazards, such as fire, would leave the documents and material in question in very considerable danger. The idea, therefore, of establishing a folklore museum at the Old Royal Hospital is one that merits general approval.
There is a case, it seems to me, for examining into whether it would be better to build de novo in a case of this kind, constructing a suitable modern building, or buildings, rather than try to rehabilitate or restore and maintain buildings that have outlived their usefulness. The situation that was disclosed as a result of the recent examination by the Committee of Public Accounts of certain expenditure would call for very great care in undertaking expenditure of that nature and I believe the House would be glad to be assured, before expenditure of that character is undertaken, that competent technical investigation is made of the physical problems involved and the financial commitments necessary to restore and maintain the building.
Some time ago I had the opportunity of visiting the King's Inns and seeing there the work done by the Benchers. The House is aware that a Vote was passed here for reimbursement, arising mainly because of funds available in the Funds of Suitors account. The King's Inns building is one of very considerable value, historically and otherwise. A great improvement is being carried out there and I believe that there is now a deficit in respect of additional work which had to be done. The Benchers of the King's Inns have undertaken work of great national value. Not merely is this building of tremendous use to law students and lawyers but it houses the best legal library in the country. I understand the Benchers made certain proposals to the Government and are prepared to discuss the position and make reasonable suggestions in order to enable the total expenditure to be reduced. One suggestion is the sale or transference to other libraries in the country, at a valuation, of certain books not necessarily essential for lawyers or students. This is a matter upon which I am not qualified to express an opinion because some may well take the view that the library is of such value it would be to the national advantage to retain it as a single entity. That is a matter for discussion between the Benchers and the appropriate Department, but I believe the expenditure incurred on the work done merits reimbursement.
The last matter to which I want to refer is the position in relation to a decision in respect of the Kennedy Memorial Concert Hall. As the Parliamentary Secretary and the House are aware, this matter was the subject of consideration by a Dáil Committee which held a great many meetings. A plan was eventually prepared. The matter was discussed on many occasions and a great deal of work was done. Subsequently, because of what is described as financial stringency, the matter was postponed, deferred, not proceeded with. I do not know in which way to describe it. I think the time has now arrived when a definite announcement should be made as to what it is intended to do. As a member of the Committee, it has struck me that the Committee has become dormant for quite some time now and I should like to hear from the Parliamentary Secretary if a definite decision has been taken and, if so, the nature of that decision; if it is proposed to proceed with the hall, I should like to know when it is proposed to start work.
Once more I am constrained to mention the unsatisfactory position of many sections of workers under the jurisdiction of the Office of Public Works employed both in Dublin and in various parts of the country. In this particular sphere of Government activity, we have a peculiar set of circumstances, circumstances common in no other employment. In normal employment, representatives of the workers can have claims discussed, can have conferences with employers or their representatives and can cement claims. Even though they may not sit down with their employers, they will at least be able to confer with authorised spokesmen of those employers and engage with them in effective negotiations. It is true that claims are not always settled by negotiation and sometimes workers are constrained to resort to their right to withdraw their labour in support of a claim.
In the Office of Public Works, we have an almost unique situation. Competent officials of the Office of Public Works are prepared to receive an application and to meet representatives of the workers concerned to discuss problems. At times it is even possible to go over the establishment officer and meet the Commissioners themselves. Cases have been known where the Parliamentary Secretary in charge of the Board of Works made representations. I say this much for them; they were usually courteous gentlemen. But mostly what happens is—at that particular stage—having indicated they have great sympathy with the cases submitted on behalf of the workers, or even gone to the point as the present incumbent's predecessor did, of indicating that he was submitting to the Minister for Finance a long and detailed recommendation, the decision on these matters has to await the pleasure and convenience of the Minister for Finance. As a matter of fact, I recollect that in the case of a former Minister for Finance, the present Senator Ryan, with regard to a matter of wage rates which had been the subject of negotiation for a long period, he gave a decision on the matter a few days before surrendering the office completely. His action in that regard was appreciated because it is possible, had he not given a decision at that stage, the workers might still be awaiting a decision.
We have had the peculiar circumstances of employees of this House— you might say those involved in servicing the House and servicing various parts of Governmental installations— who had occasion this time last year, because of neglect or unwillingness on the part of their employer to concede what was a reasonable claim, to take the action of withdrawing their labour. Members of the House will have distinct recollections of that occasion, because they were put to some inconvenience; for some time, they were almost as cold as the men who were outside the building, up the South Circular Road and elsewhere, exposed to the bitter weather of the particular time. It was found possible at that stage to get the help, even indirectly, of conciliation officers of the Labour Court, but the fact that that situation developed 12 months ago showed— and not for the first time—that the old adage is as true in 1966 as it ever was, that absolute power corrupts absolutely, because the treatment still meted out, and the lack of consideration shown to employees coming within the scope and covered by these various Votes leaves much to be desired in this year of 1966.
Earlier today, the Leas-Cheann Comhairle ruled me out of order. I hope, in discussing this matter, and referring to the matter under Subhead A—Office of Public Works, Salaries, Wages and Allowances—it will be in order for me to refer to the injustice being perpetrated on large numbers of people who carry out their duties conscientiously and diligently under the direction and control of the Commissioners of Public Works, the Parliamentary Secretary and the Minister for Finance. I had occasion to ask some questions recently and I was given details of the very large number of people employed in this authority who, if they fell ill, were left dependent upon social welfare benefits. I had occasion then—and I have occasion again—to refer to the difference in the treatment of those workers by this House, because it is carried out in the name of this House, as compared with the treatment of similar classes of workers employed in State-sponsored bodies, such as the Electricity Supply Board, local authorities, the various corporations and, even, health authorities. In these organisations, and in the employment of private employers—who claim to be progressive—one would not find a situation existing where a man, after 20 years service, if he fell ill, would have to rely solely upon social welfare benefits.
The Parliamentary Secretary may well start talking about what happens in the building trade and that he hopes, as I was told not too long ago in this House, that if and when agreement is reached between the building trade employers and the trade unions for a sick pay scheme, it will be extended to workers in the employment of the Commissioners of Public Works. It is no satisfaction to men who may fall ill today or tomorrow to be given that type of cold comfort. I am sure the Parliamentary Secretary is aware that a number of the men with long service employed in the Board of Works came there originally because they had earlier given service in the efforts to achieve freedom in this country. Many of them went there as the nominees of Ministers or Parliamentary Secretaries of Fianna Fáil Governments. But it is no satisfaction to them to know that for years these men have been suffering this form of injustice; it is no satisfaction to know that while senior civil servants, establishment officers, clerical officers, the technical grades and clerical grades, if they fall ill, are covered by sick pay benefits, these manual grades, who are not established servants, are not established officers, get, up to the present time, no such benefit.
