Before questions, I was dealing with a sore and serious problem to which I brought the Minister's attention recently by way of Parliamentary Question when I sought information as to the average service necessary in the Board of Works to qualify employees for superannuation or sick pay. I was told it was 13 years. This indicates a serious situation and again illustrates the callousness with which these workers are treated.
This treatment is not confined to Board of Works employees in Dublin. It extends to the Board's employees in various parts of the country. Employees of local authorities in Dublin qualify after 12 months to accumulate service for superannuation and sick pay purposes. Similar condition apply in the ESB and in many private undertakings. Deputies, including the Parliamentary Secretary, will be aware that many relatively small undertakings are endeavouring to heed the exhortations of the Taoiseach and members of the Government to bring their plant up to date to become more efficient in the teeth of competition on our possible entry to the Common Market. Despite that, there are still workers in public undertakings being treated in the way I have described.
I hope the Parliamentary Secretary on this occasion will not give me the same reply as he did when I asked the question previously. The employees of the Board of Works are under the direct control of this House. We are not talking about people employed by undertakings whose main interest is the accumulation of profits.
When he introduced the Estimate, the Parliamentary Secretary to some extent patted himself and the Department on the back in relation to the provision of school buildings last year. It is good to see that there was more school building but it must be said we are not satisfied that enough attention is being given to this important matter. Our aim is to provide a sufficient number of school buildings to ensure that our children will not have to travel long distance from their homes. The sum allocated for school building this year is £2,760,000 and the Parliamentary Secretary seemed to imply it was something to be proud of in the financial circumstances prevailing. We must remember that in 1963-64 the figure was £3.2 million. There has been an increase in costs since 1963-64. I should like to pose a question as to whether the amount shown in the Estimate is sufficient to provide the increase in the actual provision of schools for the current year. I referred elsewhere to the fact that there continues to be problems in the city of Dublin in this regard. It may well be that the Parliamentary Secretary and his Department are not responsible for the delays which continue to take place. I should like an assurance from the Parliamentary Secretary, given the attention by other authorities concerned, that his Department will be able to provide the schools at a more rapid pace than previously.
Reference was made by the Parliamentary Secretary to the provision of central sorting offices. A central sorting office was provided in Dublin at Sheriff Street. I do not know whether the placing of the sorting office in Sheriff Street is a good thing, having regard to the growing traffic conditions. There is another sorting office being completed in Artane, an area which the Minister for Finance and I represent as Deputies. That is a residential area which was fairly well planned to cater for both private and local authority dwellings. There is a nine acre space in the centre of the area which is gradually being developed as a park with a school bordering one side of it and a new church now being built. If anybody has a look at the design of the sorting office he will form a very poor opinion of whoever is responsible for the exact choice of site and the appearance of the sorting office itself. Whatever about the provisions inside from the point of view of dealing with the services certainly the exterior of the building and the siting of it is no credit to anybody. Possibly nothing can be done about it now but if this is to be the pattern of work carried out in this regard we might well examine our approach to it.
We are told that there are delays in the fisheries scheme at Dunmore East and Castletownbere. I do not see anything in the Parliamentary Secretary's statement regarding the development of Howth Harbour. At what particular stage are the plans in relation to Howth Harbour? It was selected some time ago as one of the areas which could be developed as a fishing centre. Reference was made to the question of extending a third pier out into the middle of the harbour. While we are dealing with the present year there is no reference to what the future will be.
The Parliamentary Secretary brushes off fairly glibly and fairly readily in his Estimate the very considerable reduction that has taken place in the employment and emergency schemes. The gross total for 1964 was £922,600. The net total of £465,000 for the Supplementary Estimate in respect of 1966-67 has to be added to this. The reduction in the various Votes under the employment and emergency schemes appears to have fallen mainly in urban employment, which has been reduced from £200,000 to £131,000 and rural employment schemes which have had over £40,000 deducted.
Employment and emergency schemes were originally introduced for the purpose of dealing with a situation in which unemployment existed and where it was necessary to provide some specific relief under this particular heading. It cannot be held that the unemployment position today is satisfactory or that the need for the employment and emergency schemes has declined. It might well be the case, if we were to get our priorities right, that we might even sacrifice a little of the facilities we have in this House if it meant that the level of assistance by way of those schemes was to be maintained or increased and the people for whom those schemes were designed to assist would get the assistance through maintaining those schemes.
This Estimate deals with coast erosion. Under this particular heading one might not only introduce the question of coast erosion but the general necessity for either the Office of Public Works or some of the local authorities to again look at the situation developing around our coastline. Much has been said about the right of the people of Ireland to own the soil of Ireland. Much has been said about the beautiful coastline of our country. There are very few countries which have such an attractive coastline but what is being done to preserve the amenities and the beauty of our coastline for the enjoyment and recreation of the ordinary citizens of our country?
Is the position not continuing to be that private individuals, private groups and private enterprise, with no regard for the Irish people as such, are increasingly obtaining strips of our coastline and increasingly depriving the ordinary people of their use and enjoyment? This is being done on a very large scale and there is little evidence of any intention on the Government's part to protect the public against this exploitation, or of any attempt to prevent the situation from developing as it has developed in a number of Continental countries. In a number of Continental countries, the ordinary citizen can only visit the seashore if he pays either a local authority or, worse still, an individual or a private group for the privilege of enjoying bathing, etc., on the strand in summertime.
On the Vote for the Ordnance Survey, Deputy Dillon made an eloquent appeal for the preservation of important architectural sites and so on. Whatever the situation is in the country, and I bow to his knowledge in this matter, the cities also possess buildings and remains of historical interest. What is being done about them?