asked the Minister for Finance whether the list of minor marine works approved by the Government and announced in May, 1969, as part of an immediate five year plan, has been proceeded with; if not, whether a decision to abandon this list was taken by the Government; if so, when; if such decision was not taken by the Government, on whose authority; and the reasons why the proposed works were abandoned.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Marine Works Programme.
27.
This programme has not been abandoned. Work has already commenced at some of the harbours listed in May, 1969, as part of a five year programme of minor marine works and work will commence on other schemes this year. All of this work, other than that at Killala which was in progress in May, 1969, was sanctioned by me. It has been found necessary to reassess part of the programme and to phase it by reference to the available staff resources.
Do I take it then that the list as announced in 1969 is not being treated, as was alleged it might then be at the time it was announced in this House, as an election gimmick, that it is, in fact, going through, that it had the authority of the Government when announced and that the Government have not gone back on that particular announcement since then?
The position is that of the 15 harbours specifically mentioned on the 21st May, 1969 by the former Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries eight have been sanctioned by the Department of Finance and it is hoped that this year work will commence at Cleggan, Emlaghmore, Roundstone and Burtonport. There is another one about which there is a specific question down. I shall deal with that separately. The allocation is £100,000 from Agriculture and Fisheries, £100,000 from Roinn na Gaeltachta and about £40,000 or £50,000 from local contributions. I regret to say that I do not think my Department will be in a position to spend the total allocation for this year on minor relief works.
I rather suspected that the £200,000 that had been talked about lately is a combination of Gaeltacht money and minor marine works money, whereas the absolute promise inherent in the statement made in May or June, 1969, was that there would be a five year programme starting immediately with £200,000 per year in that particular subhead in addition to and disregarding any and all money that might be coming from any other source, including Roinn na Gaeltachta. If it is now the position that £100,000 is from the Gaeltacht and £100,000 is from this particular subhead, then the promise of 1969 is not being honoured. In so far as the availability of staff is concerned there are works ready to go and there are workers and staff available and, in fact, if they have not got other work in the meantime they must have little if anything to do now. A year ago they were ready to go and I am quite sure they would be anxious to go but it seems to me that the money is not forthcoming and the promise is not being kept.
I have tried to explain that while the Office of Public Works are most anxious to carry on with this scheme as quickly as possible I find that in relation to the works we have planned for this year we will not be able to cope with them all as a result of the available staff. That is the situation.
Available staff?
Technical staff such as engineers. We have also run into difficulty, for instance, up in Burtonport where we have to get some heavy steel pile for pile driving there and there is a delay in delivery. We have had to order it from outside the country unfortunately.
Question No. 28.
Can the Parliamentary Secretary tell the House what happened to the £100,000?
It is lost like the other £100,000.
What use is it being put to?
(Interruptions.)
In every Department you have overspending under one heading and underspending under others. I understand that as long as your total budget comes out it is all right.
May we take it now that that was an election gimmick and an election promise made one month prior to the 1969 election?
That is not so.
And you are waiting until the next election to start the work? Three years have elapsed.
Question No. 28. We cannot discuss this question all evening.
Of the 15 that were mentioned eight have been sanctioned and four are starting this year.
(Interruptions.)
We have 160 questions to deal with.
Deputies
This is important.
The other questions are important too.
It is not a matter of discussion; it is a matter of whether or not the remark of Deputy L'Estrange is, in fact, true or not because the reflection is not on the Government as of now but on the person who made the statement on their behalf two years ago. I want it to be quite clear that it was made in good faith by me with the authority of the Government then and if it is not being adhered to at this stage I want it to go clearly from here and to be on the record that it is no doing of mine and that it was no gimmick then, whatever about it being one now.
They are turning out to be a lousy party.
I should like to assure the House that as far as the technical staff is available to the Office of Public Works, this scheme is being proceeded with and we hope to achieve the five year total as announced by the Minister at that time.
May I be allowed to address a question——
I cannot allow any further questions.
Am I right in suspecting that this is another knife in the back of Deputy Blaney by the Government?
That does not arise. That has nothing to do with the question.
Can I get this assurance from the Parliamentary Secretary that the programme as promised by Deputy Blaney prior to the 1969 general election will be implemented?
Let us have a little relevancy.
Two years have elapsed since that announcement was made and eight and four—12—out of 15 schemes are starting this year. That is certainly keeping up with the programme as planned.
It was to be finished in five years.
Question No. 28.