Vol. 260 No. 14
I move:
That a sum not exceeding £12,851,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1973, 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; for the execution and maintenance of drainage and other engineering works; and for payment of certain grants-in-aid.
The amount being sought this year for Vote 8, namely, £12,851,000, is £1,988,600 greater than the total amount voted last year for corresponding services. The administrative subheads of the Vote, A, B, and C, account for £150,000 of the increase. This is due in the main to 13th round salary increases, to higher travelling and subsistence rates and to increased provisions for the purchase of office machinery and equipment and for computer rental.
The provision under subhead D is mainly to cover purchases of sites and premises for Government services in Dublin and the provinces and for the purchase of the fee simple of some existing leasehold properties. A provisional amount for the purchase of the site of national monuments at Tara has again been included as it is expected that the appeal against the court decision regarding the purchase proceedings will come up for hearing in the Supreme Court later this year.
A list of the works for which provision has been made under subhead E, New Works, Alterations and Additions, has already been supplied to Deputies. I will comment only on the more significant items, but I shall, of course, be glad to supply additional particulars of any other projects if Deputies require them.
The first two items on the list relate to works at Leinster House; namely, the installation of the simultaneous translating system from Irish into English and the provision of a glass screen around the front of the Public Gallery in this Chamber. As I mentioned when introducing last year's estimates, the translating system will be installed during this year's summer recess. I am sure that Deputies will agree with me that the removal of the old grille from the front of the Public Gallery greatly improved the appearance of the Chamber and it is rather a pity to have to replace it now with another structure. Every effort will be made to do a neat job which will detract as little as possible from the appearance of the House.
Next on the list come works under the general heading of Finance. These are mainly concerned with the provision, improvement or adaptation of accommodation for various Departments. The total provision is £1.25 million, nearly double last year's total of £0.661 million. There are a few large size projects which take up most of the provision. Some are in progress and others at the planning stage. Among those in progress are a building at Inchicore for a computer unit which will serve a number of Departments; the building for the Stamping Branch of the Revenue Commissioners in Dublin Castle and the fitting out of the new office block at Kildare Place in which all of the headquarters staff of the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries will be centralised. These three buildings will, I expect, be in commission early next year.
There are two large-scale projects at the planning stage; firstly a group of works for the Revenue Commissioners, the largest of which is the provision of a suite for a new computer being acquired by them to cope with the expanding work of revenue collection.
Secondly, there is the provision of a building at Clonskea for the Institute of Public Administration and the Department of Finance training centre. These activities are at present carried on in separate premises neither of which is adequate or suitable for its purpose. It has been decided in the interests of economy and efficiency that a new building should be erected to house both the institute and the training centre thus enabling these bodies to provide adequate training facilities for the employees of the State, local authority and other bodies which should make the project well worthwhile.
Provisions are made for new Government offices at three provincial centres, Drogheda, Letterkenny and Waterford. These are welcome provisions as accommodation at provincial centres is not in many cases up to a desirable standard.
I will deal separately with the six items Nos. 21-26, each of which has its own special interest. In regard to item 21, last year following a competition organised by Oireachtas na Gaeilge for a suitable inscription for the back wall of the Garden of Rememberance a poem was selected and preliminary arrangements are now being made for the cutting of the inscription on the wall. The work will be put in hands as soon as possible.
The provision in item 22 is to cover some expenses in connection with the planning of the memorial to the late President John F. Kennedy.
The provision in item 23 is required for the memorial to Roger Casement in Glasnevin Cemetery. The statue has now been cast and the next step is the construction of a pedestal and the inscription of the name on it. I look forward to seeing the statue erected and unveiled this year.
Items 24 and 25 concern the restoration of Scoil Éanna which was handed over to the State in April, 1970. Stage I which consisted of the re-roofing of the buildings is now nearing completion, and the planning of the second stage, that is, internal repairs and restoration, is in hand. At the same time works on the grounds are proceeding. These had reached the stage last September when it was found possible to allow the public to have access to the greater portion of the grounds. A temporary playing pitch was made available last year and it is hoped to commence work on the permanent pitches later this year. Although much work still remains to be done, the grounds form a very attractive park well worth a visit for its own sake as well as for its associations with the Pearse family.
The last of these special items, item 26, is Stage II of the restoration of the Royal Hospital, Kilmainham to provide badly needed additional accommodation for the National Museum. The planning of this project is in hands and every effort will be made to accelerate it.
The provision in item 27 is for improvements to the main landing place in Clare Island, County Mayo, which are being carried out in the interests of transport and communication. The existing pier is narrow and inadequate. The proposal is to extend and widen the pier, raise the deck level, extend the paved area to provide a sloping quay, install a crane and provide a new winch and boat cradle.
When British Rail decided early in the nineteen sixties to start operating the car ferry, item 28, the question of erecting a terminal at Dún Laoghaire was examined. The East Pier was considered first for this purpose, but because of amenity considerations, it was decided to locate the terminal at St. Michael's Wharf instead. In order to facilitate British Rail, who were anxious to commence their operations in 1965, temporary facilities were provided at the East Pier terminal, but an undertaking was given that these would be removed when the permanent facilities were provided. The permanent car ferry terminal was opened in 1969 but the facilities on the East Pier were allowed to remain to cope with any "teething" troubles that might arise in the first few years of operation of the St. Michael's Wharf terminal. The car customs building and fencing, which were the features particularly objected to, were removed in 1970 and the site re-surfaced. The removal of the other features, the approach bridge, Bailey bridge, Syncrolift, link span and the outer of the two stern dolphins, is now proposed, and the provision of £10,000 is for that purpose.
In regard to item 34, there have been unavoidable delays in placing a contract for the restoration of the Picture Gallery wing of Kilkenny Castle but I am confident that the outstanding problems will be resolved very shortly and that work will commence soon. I mentioned last year that part of the cost of restoring the castle might come from voluntary subscriptions. The Butler Society have now launched a fund-raising campaign for the restoration of the south tower and are very hopeful about reaching their target. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the society on their initiative and to wish them every success in their efforts to raise funds for the restoration of this very historic Kilkenny landmark.
A sum of £10,000 is being provided for the erection of a visitor centre at Dunmore Cave, County Kilkenny, item 35. Difficulties about providing a water supply for the building have delayed this project but as soon as these are overcome tenders will be invited. All going well the centre should be open for the reception of visitors by the 1973 tourist season.
Concerning item 37, last year the Office of Public Works initiated a general scheme of improvements on the River Shannon navigation to cope with the growing popularity of pleasure cruising and other recreational uses. This year it is hoped to build new quays at Portumna, Knockvicar and Mountshannon and to extend the existing quays at Lanesboro and Tuamgraney. It is intended also to install automatic lifting gears for the bridge at Portumna in order to speed up the passage of boats and reduce road traffic delays about which there have been complaints.
£290,000 is being provided for works for the Department of Justice. The major part of the provision is for the erection of new Garda stations and the improvement of existing ones. In an effort to accelerate the provision of new stations and married quarters recourse was had to system buildings for small stations and by the end of this year, at least 12 new stations each with a house attached will have been provided by this means, at places ranging from Wexford to Donegal. Larger stations are being planned for Skibbereen, Castleblayney, Castlerea, Granard, Kanturk and Limerick. I mentioned last year that a very suitable site had been acquired for the central station in Limerick, and I am glad to say now that the planning is in full progress. Improvement schemes are under way or are being planned for several stations, the most important of which are Store Street and Mountjoy in the Dublin area. The new station at Rathmines has just been completed while work on the Ballymun station is proceeding satisfactorily.
Another important work is the erection of a new building in Dublin Castle to house a new communications centre. A contract has been placed and work is scheduled for completion in November next to time with the delivery of the new equipment on order by the Department. In addition to the projects listed, the Office of Public Works are carrying out a major programme of improvements et cetera at prisons the cost of which is being met from the Prisons Vote.
The provisions under items 48 and 52 are for the first stages of new office premises for staffs of the Departments of Education and Lands at Athlone and Castlebar respectively. It is expected that tenders for construction work will be invited towards the end of this year.
Last year the grant expenditure on the building and improvement of primary schools was £3,665,000 approximately. 53 new buildings were erected and major improvements were carried out to 48 other schools. 21,570 new pupil places were thus provided and a further 7,000 places were made available in prefabricated units.
The amount included in this year's estimate for school buildings is £4 million. A large proportion of the money will again be spent on providing schools for new areas in cities and towns.
The provision of special schools for mentally and physically handicapped children received special attention during the last year. Two projects were completed during the year, works are in progress in two cases and a further 26 are at various stages of preparation. The facilities to be provided in special schools have been reassessed and, as a result, amendments will be made to plans for schools now being prepared. The new range of school furniture designed following the introduction of the new curriculum, is now available and will be supplied to all new primary schools in future.
The policy of amalgamation of small rural schools into larger central units is continuing. The total number of national schools in operation has been reduced to approximately 3,900 from the peak of about 4,800.
The provisions for the preventive centre at Finglas and the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies are required to pay off the balance of final accounts; both buildings are now occupied.
The provision of £150,000 for the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries is mainly for laboratory buildings in connection with that Department's research, training and advisory functions.
An estimated expenditure of £245,000 is provided for 17 projects for the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. Among the 17 are eight new post offices and a computer building together with an engineering training centre at Dundrum. The Office of Public Works will also carry out over £600,000 worth of telephone exchange building work for the Department in the current year, the cost of which will be paid for out of the Telephone Capital Account.
The last item in this subhead on which I propose to comment is the fitting out of new offices in Brussels for the Department of Foreign Affairs. It is seldom that this Department figures in my statement on the Estimates, but this year as a result of our decision to join the EEC it is necessary to provide suitable permanent office premises in Brussels for our representatives and staff. New offices which are being rented will require to be fitted out and furnished and the provision of £25,000 is needed for that purpose.
I should, perhaps, mention for Deputies' information that the provisions for major fishery harbours, for works in the fishing interest at other harbours and for miscellaneous marine works have been transferred this year to the Vote for Fisheries, but my office will still be responsible for executing these works as is the case with works carried out for Roinn na Gaeltachta and financed from funds provided in the Vote for that Department.
The position regarding the fishery harbours is that Dunmore East is nearly finished and will cost about £800,000. The mainland wharf at Castletownbere fishery harbour centre is also finished and a contract has been placed for a bridge to connect the mainland with Dinish Island. A wharf and Syncrolift are in the course of construction on the island, and the final cost of the harbour will be more than £900,000. Work is proceeding at Killybegs fishery harbour centre. A contract is about to be placed for a new pier and servicing quay and a Syncrolift is being provided also. The total cost of this scheme will work out at £850,000 approximately.
Improvement schemes at a number of other harbours are in hand or will start this year. These include Killala and Portahaulia, County Mayo; Burtonport and Portaleen, County Donegal; Cleggan, Emlaghmore and Roundstone, County Galway; Kilkee and White Strand, County Clare.
The Office of Public Works are also carrying out numerous marine works for Roinn na Gaeltachta. The largest of these, a harbour improvement scheme at Rossaveel, is estimated to cost about £360,000 and will, I hope, start this year. This scheme will provide new harbour facilities at Rossaveel, with much improved flotation. A scheme for dredging at Dingle Harbour and improvement of the pier is in hands, and will cost about £130,000.
Before passing on from subhead E, I would like to mention that at my request the Commissioners of Public Works considered the problems confronting the physically handicapped in gaining access to and utilising the facilities available in public buildings under the commissioners' control.
I am happy to announce that, as a result of their research, the commissioners—who are completely sympathetic to the problems—have had prepared and have issued to their architectural staff a code of instructions covering the special problems that may arise. This, it is hoped, will go a very long way towards the elimination from public buildings, in the commissioners' charge, of barriers and obstacles which at present constitute serious handicaps for the physically disabled. The area covered by the instructions ranges from standards for approaches to buildings, to the provision of visual aids for the deaf. I hope that the issue of those instructions by the commissioners, who are responsible for the great bulk of the State's direct building operations, will motivate other groups and planners to provide as far as possible for the physically handicapped. The commissioners will, of course, be happy to supply copies of the instructions to any concerns who may be interested.
It is accepted that experience may show that the instructions may need some revision. It is the intention, therefore, to have the situation reviewed formally in two or three years time when any changes or modifications found to be desirable or necessary as a result of experience can be made.
The F group of subheads provides for the cost of servicing State properties. Subhead F.1 provides for the maintenance of State premises including the State harbours of Dún Laoghaire, Howth and Dunmore East, the River Shannon navigation and the national parks. Last year I referred to the many problems involved in managing the Phoenix Park in present-day circumstances. I mentioned that a team of architectural students from the college of technology, Bolton Street, had undertaken a full amenity study of the park. The survey work has been completed and I look forward with interest to receiving the report of the students which I understand should be ready by July. I am sure that the students will have some stimulating suggestions to make which should greatly assist the Office of Public Works in formulating up-to-date policies for the better management of the park.
The numbers of visitors to Derrynane, the home of Daniel O'Connell, continue to grow and new coach and car parks have recently been provided to facilitate visitors. Other visitor facilities such as toilets and picnic sites have also been provided.
Subhead F.2 covers the provision of replacement furniture and additional items required for existing buildings. The increase over the 1971-72 provision is necessary in view of the expanding needs of the Civil Service. This subhead includes the cost of running the furniture prototype unit who were set up over three years ago. Since then the unit have been of invaluable assistance in raising the standards of furniture financed from public funds. In particular I would like to mention the range of furniture now being supplied to primary schools to meet the requirements of the new curriculum. Prototype and pilot production runs of this furniture were manufactured to a very high quality in the unit.
The increase under subhead F.3 is due mainly to the need of leasing additional space to house the expanding staffs of various Departments and to increased rents. Extra accommodation has been rented for the Departments of Finance, Agriculture and Fisheries, Labour, Local Government and Foreign Affairs including the new office accommodation in Brussels to which I have already referred.
I have, I think, on more than one occasion expressed the view that, ideally, office accommodation for Civil Service staffs should be built by the State itself. This whole question is under review at present.
The increased costs of electricity and other fuels and the provision of additional premises together with improvement in the standard of office and other accommodation account for the increase of £74,000 in subhead F.4.
The G group of subheads contains provision for expenditure in connection with the programme of arterial drainage being carried out under the Arterial Drainage Act, 1945. The most important of the group are G.1, G.2, and G.3. Deputies will observe that arterial drainage maintenance which was formerly G.5 is now dealt with as G.3.
Subhead G.1 provides for the expenses of field surveys and hydrometric surveys which are a necessary preliminary to the preparation of arterial drainage schemes. For this £30,000 is requested; last year's original provision was £30,000 but there was a supplementary Vote of £3,000. As I mentioned when introducing the Vote for 1971-72 in November last, a number of schemes are at various stages of preparation or consideration. Field survey work for these schemes is, however, substantially finished or very advanced in most cases and so it has been possible to reduce the amount required in this connection from £15,000 to £5,000. On the general question of future schemes I would refer Deputies to my statement last November that in view of the fact that the Office of Public Works has in relation to drainage been operating to a 30-year old brief, a full scale cost/benefit study of the service as administered at present had been put in hands and an outline analysis specifying the lines on which the investigation should proceed had been agreed. The study is being carried out by a broad-based steering group comprising representatives of the Office of Public Works, the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, including the land project, An Foras Talúntais and the Department of Finance. This group meet regularly to organise the various field surveys which are being conducted by specialist agencies such as fishery experts or local authority agricultural advisers, and to consider, classify and draw conclusions from the resultant data. The study will take account of all aspects of arterial drainage, both pro and con, and can be relied on to produce valuable pointers in the matter for use in the consideration of future allocations from the capital budget. Steady progress is being made and my previous estimate for a completion date may, all going well, be improved upon to allow for a report at the end of the year.
Portion of subhead G.1 provides for hydrometric operations. As I stated in November, the hydrometric unit is becoming progressively more important and its scope is widening in line with the increasing awareness of the development potential of our water resources. The growing demands of the service are marked in the increased provision of £25,000 requested. This is required to allow the service to meet the new demands being made on it for river flow data. Indeed, I can see the need to consider the development of this service in future years, perhaps even beyond the bounds of its present functions as a drainage ancillary.
Subhead G.2 provides for expenditure on works in progress. The amount being requested, £878,000, provides for the continuance of the vast Boyne scheme as well as the Groody operation in Limerick and for the completion of the Corrib-Headford scheme. The Maigue scheme has been exhibited and the requisite statutory processes are in hands. The scheme is not, however, provided for in the present Estimate. The catchment is the prototype chosen for the cost/benefit study and the matter of its drainage will be reviewed in the light of the study report which, as I have stated, may be available at the end of this year.
I would like to mention in this connection that I had the honour recently of presenting prizes to the winners of top awards in Student Project, 1972, sponsored by the Irish National Productivity Committee and the Bank of Ireland. The first prize in the junior grade was won by a group of students from Trim vocational school and the subject they selected was the Boyne drainage scheme. The project was, indeed, an excellent one and before they recorded their findings the group sought the views of farmers, workers, business interests, property owners, conservationists, archaeologists, et cetera, on the advantages and disadvantages of the scheme. It is encouraging to find students of such an age group prepared to tackle such an involved economic and social question and the maturity of their findings was remarkable.
Subhead G.3 provides for the maintenance of completed schemes. The sum requested, £555,000, shows a sizeable increase on last year's final provision of £445,000 and reflects the further progress in the arterial drainage programme resulting in additional schemes being completed and coming on maintenance.
I am asking for £540,000 for subhead H for the purchase and maintenance of engineering plant and machinery, the purchase of stores and the payment of wages to the workshop staffs. It is intended to continue with the planned replacement of the fleet of dragline excavators with more modern and more efficient hydraulic excavators which will reduce working costs.
Under Subhead I provision for coast protection works has been increased to £70,000. It is hoped to have the schemes at Youghal, County Cork and Moville, County Donegal completed this year and also to carry out new schemes at Strandhill, County Sligo and Rossnowlagh, County Donegal. Preliminary investigations have been carried out at Enniscrone, County Sligo and at Ballyvoile, County Waterford, and an investigation is to be carried out shortly in the Maharees district, County Kerry. Provision is also included under this subhead for maintenance of protection works at Rosslare Strand, County Wexford, and at the Murrough, County Wicklow.
The execution of coast protection works has not proceeded as quickly as I had hoped, and I know that many Deputies are impatient with the rate of progress to date, in cases where county councils have submitted proposals under the Coast Protection Act, 1963. Design of coast protection schemes requires considerable knowledge and experience. The existing staff is numerically small and, to carry out an expanded programme, a greater number would necessarily be required. I am having the staff position examined with a view to accelerating the programme.
Subhead J.1 provides for expenditure on national monuments. The amount sought £270,000, represents an increase of £109,500 on the amount originally voted last year. The increased amount is due to a general expansion of activities on the conservation of national monuments in State care which now number over 1,000, and on their presentation and interpretation to visitors and also on archaeological exploration.
During the past year the work force which is employed directly was increased from approximately 70 men to around 130. This is in line with the policy to expand the national monuments service to meet the pressing demands at national and local levels in regard to the protection, preservation and presentation of monuments and the evergrowing threat to this part of our national heritage from modern social and economic developments.
Maintenance of monuments is now carried out on a regional basis from five district centres, a new centre having been established last year to cater for the north western region. Arrangements are in train to open a further district centre during the current year. As a result of the increased labour force and other organisational changes an extended programme of works is being undertaken, both in regard to the routine work of keeping monuments in a safe and presentable condition and the execution of major conservation works.
The works at Cahir Castle, County Tipperary were completed last year and a guide service similar to that provided at Newgrange Tumulus and Rock of Cashel was initiated. Since Cahir Castle was opened to the public at the end of June last it has attracted some thousands of visitors. A scheme of conservation works was also completed at Ballinacarriga Castle, County Cork.
Major conservation schemes are continuing at Portumna Castle and Clontuskert Abbey, County Galway; St. Francis Friary, Kilkenny city; Kells Priory, County Kilkenny; Kanturk Castle, County Cork; Trim Castle, Knowth, and Newgrange, County Meath; Creevylea Abbey, County Sligo, and major works have begun at Ballyhack Castle, County Wexford, Claregalway Abbey, County Galway and Parkes Castle, County Sligo. Minor works have been carried out at several sites including Boyle Abbey, County Roscommon; Sligo Abbey; Carrowmore Megaliths; Rathgall Hillfort, County Wicklow; Athassel Abbey, County Tipperary; Liathmore, County Tipperary, and Timoleague Abbey, County Cork.
Archaeological excavations at 16 sites were financed in 1971 by the commissioners. Excavations will continue at some of these this year as well as at some new sites where excavation is a necessary preliminary to conservation works. The increasing public interest in archaeological excavations in this country is a reflection of this expanded programme.
The archaeological survey set up in 1965 to record scientifically all monuments will continue again this year in Counties Westmeath, Longford and Cavan.
Last year I said that it was intended in co-operation with Bord Fáilte to provide information plaques at selected monuments. There was delay in getting the plaques from the suppliers but this has now been overcome and I hope that my promise will be fulfilled shortly.
Subhead J.2 provides for a grant-in-aid towards the cost of the restoration of Holycross Abbey, County Tipperary, for which special legislation was enacted in 1969. The cost of the restoration work is being borne by diocesan trustees and lodgments made are credited to appropriations-in-aid (subhed L). Conservation works to the fabric of the monument will be paid for by the State. Good progress is being made with the works and the amount provided in the grant-in-aid is the estimated expenditure in the current year. It is evident from the large number of people visiting the works that the project has a great appeal both nationally and internationally.
Subhead K covers the annual grant-in-aid for the operation and maintenance of the yacht "Asgard". As Deputies know, the "Asgard" is administered by a committee set up by the Government and is being used for the training of young people in the art of sailing. I understand that they have quite a big programme this year extending from April to October and that they intend to take part in some international racing.
I have covered the main activities of the Commissioners of Public Works in this statement. If I have omitted reference to any item on which Deputies desire information. I shall be only too happy to give it in my reply.
I move:
That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration.
I welcome the increase in this year's Estimate, but I believe it is not enough. When one takes into consideration the 8 to 9 per cent inflationary increase each year and the extra wages that have to be paid, it is obvious that the same amount of work cannot be done this year as was done last year. In 1966-67 a sum of over £18 million was spent by the Office of Public Works. The sum provided now is £5 million less than the sum provided in 1966-67. We have 80,000 unemployed and those of us who are interested in our country and its future want to see work provided for these people. The Board of Works are an excellent medium through which to provide work because the work done by that body provides employment for those who most need employment. In the county council road grants at the moment there is less for the ordinary road worker. Under the Department of Lands there is less for the ordinary worker. In the Forestry Division there is less for the ordinary worker. At the same time the bill for higher officials is increasing every year. If this trend of providing less for the ordinary worker continues we will have a revolution. None of us want to see that. I am certainly disappointed that this year we are spending less than the amount that we spent in 1966-67. The sooner we get back to the 1966-67 figure the better it will be because this expenditure would enable the Government to provide work for many of the 80,000 unemployed.
I should like to pay tribute to the Parliamentary Secretary and to the officials of the Office of Public Works. I have always found the Parliamentary Secretary and his officials most courteous and helpful. It is our duty to give credit where credit is due.
This Estimate is one of the most interesting that comes before us. It covers a wide variety of operations with many ramifications. The Office of Public Works originated under the Act of 1831. They are now 140 years old and still going strong. I hope they will grow even stronger in the years ahead and I trust no attention will be paid to the recommendations of the Devlin Report. I shall come back to that later.
The Act of 1831 vested in the Office of Public Works the responsibilities of some eight boards the functions of which were directly or indirectly concerned with the execution and maintenance of public works, with the collection of loans advanced for that particular purpose and the making of fresh loans and grants. The Office of Public Works were charged with the execution of many services. Their duties were later expanded, though on some occasions they were contracted as the vicissitudes of the times and the changing political situation demanded.
The operations of the Board of Works cover nearly every Department, practically every part of the country and enter into many features of our life. They serve so many Departments that it is difficult for them to escape criticism and very often criticism is showered on them when it is the Department for which they are agents that is to blame. In the past it was fashionable to decry the Board of Works but they were often blamed for the sins of others and at times were unfairly criticised. As the agents responsible for doing the work of other Departments, they are bound to get the criticism which should fall on these Departments for lack of effort or, perhaps, of finance. It may be that the Department of Education has not money to build schools or the Department of Justice the money to give to the Board of Works to build courthouses and, perhaps, the board is wrongly criticised.
The board carries out a wide spectrum of operations and, as the Parliamentary Secretary said today, they do so in many cases with an inadequate staff. The Office of Public Works is regarded as a repository of knowledge in relation to the whole country. With its history and tradition, the various skills, the engineers, architects and persons with very high professional status that it has, it is in a position to give a lead on standards and provide a first-class service. I believe it has a unique opportunity to set proper standards in building, design and workmanship. By doing so, it can ensure that the work done by local authorities and even by the private sector will have a high standard. The standard in building, though not, perhaps, in design, has fallen in many cases and too many are prepared to accept second best. That should not be so. Therefore, I believe that the Board of Works should set high standards which others can follow.
Many recommendations of the Devlin Report are good and the majority of them are worthy of consideration but those in regard to the Office of Public Works are bad in my opinion and it would be a retrograde step for the Government to adopt them. The Office of Public Works should continue and be enlarged rather than have its operations split up. Fragmentation is not wise where specialist staff are involved. I entirely agree with the Parliamentary Secretary when he said on 19th November, 1970 as reported at column 1766 of the Official Report:
I am satisfied that time will prove it unwise to break up specialist staff. I am already firmly convinced that there is far too much competition between individual Departments for professional staff.
I agree that instead of further fragmentation it would be proper to centralise all the professional staff in one Department and I think the proper place to do that would be in the Board of Works and not have Government Departments competing against each other. I think on that occasion the Parliamentary Secretary gave instances in which Government Departments had been competing against one another and wasting public money. If they are all under the Board of Works, as I believe they should be, there could be a full exchange of views and ideas and their specialist knowledge could be tapped and used for the nation as a whole. That is what we, as politicians, should be interested in.
The final recommendation of the Devlin Report in regard to the Office of Public Works suggested it should be distributed between five Departments. It was stated on page 415:
We recommend that many of the present functions of the Office of Public Works should be distributed among other Departments and that the remaining functions of the Office should be concentrated in the new Central Procurement Office of the Public Service Department.
This would be a retrograde step which I hope is not contemplated by the Government: I know it is not accepted judging by the Parliamentary Secretary's speech.
As I can see from the Estimates, the Office of Public Works acts for the Oireachtas, the Department of the Taoiseach, the Departments of Finance, Justice, Education, Agriculture and Fisheries, Labour, Social Welfare, Posts and Telegraphs and I think, in fact, for all Departments, or nearly all. They do not serve State or semi-State organisations, local authority housing, post-primary schools, hospitals and airports. Instead of clipping the wings of the Office of Public Works I believe they should have the added responsibility of working for State and semi-State bodies, building local authority houses, hospitals, post-primary schools and airports. I think they would do much better work than is being done at present. Many of us have seen money squandered on buildings by State and semi-State bodies where planning was at fault and in some cases buildings had to be pulled down before they were even used at a cost in one particular instance of up to £100,000. What the nation wants in the competitive period that is certainly ahead with our entry into the EEC is more efficiency and better value for the people's money. I believe we can get that from the professional staff at present in the Office of Public Works. If we are to be competitive and efficient in the future, we need less duplication and complication and more initiative and I think that can be got from the experts of the Office of Public Works. They have tremendous responsibility at present and I am in favour of giving them more and not less as has been suggested in the Devlin Report. They are not perfect. None of us is. No Department are perfect. They need internal reorganisation to make them more effective to meet the various calls made on them and to become more efficient in the competitive period which lies ahead following our entry into the EEC. I cannot understand the mentality behind the Devlin Report in this particular recommendation.
Let us assume that we had a system whereby every Department would provide their own buildings, where the Department of Education would build all the schools and the Department of Justice provide and maintain all the courthouses and garda barracks. There would be duplication of engineers, architects and professional people. There would be a waste of time and duplication of effort. If a commission, such as the Devlin Commission, were to report on the efficiency of Departments which were being run in that manner they would regard such a situation as ridiculous as they would find this overlapping and duplication. They would ask why each Department had set up their own organisations and note that the work was that of engineers and architects. They would ask would it not be logical to rationalise the system and to have one Department dealing with such work so that the architectural and engineering skills and research could be co-ordinated and used to the best advantage. This is what we have in the Office of Public Works. Perhaps that Office could be improved and brought up-to-date.
I have often pointed out to young people who were talking about tearing down the foundations of the State and building from the ground upwards that it would be better to build on the foundations which we have rather than to scrap them and to build from the beginning again. It would take years to do that. I hope that the Office of Public Works, instead of having their wings clipped, will get extra responsibility. They are in a position to shoulder more responsibility and to have the work done more efficiently than any other body in the State could do it.
I would like to refer to a publication called Oibre. It was first issued in 1964 by that dynamic character, the late Donogh O'Malley. The book dealt with the activities of the Office of Public Works. The aim was to have one or two issues each year giving information about works in progress, work contemplated and plans being prepared, as well as information on historic topics. The late Donogh O'Malley pointed out that the main purpose of the journal was to disseminate information to the public about this very old organisation with their wide range of activities, many of them of great national importance. It was a very good idea. There is a lack of communication between the majority of Government Departments and the public. Oibre is succeeding in its aims and in its objects.
We were informed that:
The amount being sought this year for Vote 8, that is £12,851,000, is £1,988,600 greater than the total amount voted last year for corresponding services.
I have already mentioned that in 1966-67 a total of £18,750,953 was spent under this particular heading. It is a retrograde step to reduce that figure. The sooner we get back to spending the amount we were spending then the sooner will we provide work for our own people and reduce the number of unemployed.
The fitting out of new offices in Brussels for the Department of Foreign Affairs was mentioned. This is as a result of a decision taken by the people recently. I entirely agree with that decision. It is a challenge to each of us in the years ahead. I hope that the offices built at Brussels will be a credit to the nation and to the Office of Public Works.
The Office of Public Works are responsible for a programme of school construction and renovation to meet the needs of primary education. This branch of the Office of Public Works has expanded in recent years and is now one of the main activities of this Office. We were told that:
Last year the grant expenditure on the building and improvement of primary schools was £3,665,000 approximately. Fifty-three new buildings were erected and major improvements were carried out to 48 other schools.
There is much to be done in this direction. We should have a crash programme for school buildings. It is unreasonable to find that many of our schools have not got flush toilets or proper toilet facilities. It is wrong that school children should have to tolerate conditions which should make politicians blush with shame.
I asked a question yesterday and the reply I got was that I should refer to other replies which were given to me on 14th and 16th December, 1971, to similar questions. I was told that the information from the survey referred to will not be available until June, 1972. I was also told that good progress was being made with regard to the provision of sanitary facilities and proper heating in all our primary schools. I looked up the answers given on 14th and 16th December, 1971, to similar questions. I found that the question as regards flush toilets was answered by saying that from the information available it was not possible to give the up-to-date position. Many of us know the neglect in this regard in schools in rural Ireland. As regards the number of schools heated, it is estimated that about 650 of the 3,939 national schools are not equipped with electric current and that some 1,200 schools are heated by open fires. In this day and age this should be attended to.
It is the Minister for Education who is responsible.
Yes, Sir, but if we compare the work the Office of Public Works have done in having a shell-pink bathroom for the Taoiseach and duck-egg blue bathrooms for other Ministers——
The Office of Public Works do what they are asked to do. They are an agency for the various Departments.
It is wrong that there should be these inhuman conditions. I am not sure what the Office of Public Works can do to bring it to the notice of the proper authorities but something should be done about this matter.
The Deputy would have to bring the matter to the attention of the Minister for Education.
Yesterday I asked the Minister for Finance the number of pupil places provided in primary schools by the Office of Public Works each year for the past ten years in prefabricated units and ordinary buildings. I shall not quote the figures as it would take too long but in 1968-69 there were 11,200 pupil places provided in prefabricated units and 19,200 in permanent buildings. Over 60 per cent of the buildings were prefabricated. In 1971-72, 7,000 pupil places were provided in prefabricated units and 21,564 in permanent buildings. This is a step in the right direction. The percentage has dropped from 60 to 33. The more permanent buildings built by the Office of Public Works, the better for everybody concerned.
The Minister mentioned a scheme for the building of schools for mentally and physically handicapped children. It is most desirable that such schools should be provided and any expenditure on these schools would meet with general approval. This is money well spent. In the past there was a long waiting period of eight to ten years. If handicapped children are got to suitable schools in time they can become useful citizens. All concerned are to be congratulated on the work being done for handicapped children.
I asked a question about this matter yesterday. I find from the reply that in 1967-68 three schools were completed at a cost of £97,000; in 1968-69, six schools were completed at a cost of £232,000; 1969-70, four schools, at a cost of £216,000; 1970-71, nine schools, at a cost of £364,000; last year, two schools at a cost of £87,000. According to the Parliamentary Secretary today, it is intended to commence work on a further nine schools. Everybody concerned is to be congratulated.
The Parliamentary Secretary stated that £290,000 was being provided for works for the Department of Justice; that the major part of the provision is for the erection of new Garda stations and the improvement of existing ones; that in an effort to accelerate the provision of new stations and married quarters recourse was being had to system buildings for small stations and that, by the end of this year, at least 12 new stations, each with a house attached, will have been provided by this means, at places ranging from Wexford to Donegal. We welcome this provision because the condition of many Garda barracks is a disgrace. In Leinster House we have carpeted floors and central heating. Civil servants in Dublin have central heating and wall-to-wall carpets. We cannot be proud of the condition of some Garda barracks. There are whitewashed walls, smoking chimneys, windows that will not open or shut. There is no proper furniture. Some of the beds are beds that were used during the 1914-18 war. Proper wardrobes are not provided. The walls are damp. These men, who are responsible for the maintenance of law and order, should not be expected to live in such inhuman conditions. A crash programme is required for the provision of suitable accommodation. Some of the places in which gardaí are expected to live are unfit for human habitation. The State should do everything possible to reward the Garda Síochána for the outstanding service they are giving by providing the conditions and facilities to which they are entitled.
There is provision in the Estimate to cover some expenses in connection with the planning of the memorial to the late President John F. Kennedy. The word "some" makes me smile, in view of the promises about this matter made in the past. The suggestion of building a memorial to the late John F. Kennedy was hailed with enthusiasm. All that has been done was to buy a site and to pay fees to the architect. That may not be the fault of the Office of Public Works. I do not know. It might be no harm to quote from the Official Report of 11th June, 1970, a speech made by Deputy Moore. He stated:
I had a question down last week— that would have been on 8th or 9th June, 1970
—about the proposed memorial hall and I am told now that plans are being completed and estimates will be invited. However, the cost is increasing all the time and perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary might consider the erection of even a temporary hall.
That was in 1970. The Deputy had been told that plans were complete and estimates would be invited. We would like to know why the public are being fooled. Why not tell the people the truth? I put down this question for answer on Tuesday, 16th May, 1972:
To ask the Minister for Finance the present position regarding the John F. Kennedy memorial hall and the expenditure to date.
I quote the reply:
It has not yet been possible for me to consult with the Government in regard to the John F. Kennedy memorial hall. Expenditure to date, which has been predominantly on the purchase of site and consultants' fees, amounts to approximately £247,000.
I cannot understand why the Minister could not consult. Surely there is not an argument such as there was two years ago? I asked the Minister why it had not been possible for him to consult the Government, that the House had been told two years ago that tenders were about to be invited. The Minister, Deputy Colley, said that there had been certain developments which had altered the proposal he intended bringing to the Government and that as a result of this the proposal was being re-processed and would be brought to the Government very soon. I asked if it was intended to use the present site or to move to another. The Minister said that I would have to wait for that answer.
The people are entitled to know what the Minister for Finance intends to do about the John F. Kennedy memorial hall. The people should not be given foolish promises. The Government should come clean on this and say where the memorial hall is to be sited. The information I have, and which may be wrong, is that the Office of Public Works are considering siting the memorial somewhere else in the city.
I should like to mention a complaint I get frequently from contractors, in many cases small contractors who build Garda barracks, national schools or who install central heating and so on, that when they are finished the work they have to wait, sometimes for 15 to 18 months, for their money. I am not saying that all complaints that Deputies get are justified but if this complaint is true the cause should be removed. If it is true it is very unfair, especially on small contractors, to have to wait so long. The Board of Works do not deserve all the criticism they come in for but they are dealing with so many Departments and there is so much duplication of work that this is bound to lead to delays and frustrations at times. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to cut away as much red tape as possible and to expedite payment for jobs done. I know it may not always be the fault of the Board of Works because if a Garda barracks or a courthouse has been built it may first have to be cleared with the Department of Justice before payment can finally be made. If those complaints are true, I would like them to be attended to. I should like, in passing, to congratulate the building agency for its efficiency in regard to work done since its foundation.
Under subhead F.3 the Parliamentary Secretary stated today:
The increase under subhead F.3 is due mainly to the need of leasing additional space to house the expanding staffs of various Departments and to increased rents. Extra accommodation has been rented for the Departments of Finance, Agriculture and Fisheries, Labour, Local Government and Foreign Affairs including the new office accommodation in Brussels to which I have already referred.
It is understandable as regards the new office in Brussels but it seems funny that a building agency like the Office of Public Works cannot provide many of those buildings. Many people claim that the Office of Public Works are a God-send to speculators—many of them foreign—who are building huge office buildings in this country. I do not know exactly what is being spent on them this year. Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary would give us the information when he is replying. The annual rent charged in 1967 was £250,194. In 1968 it went up to £343,260. In 1969 it was £347,506 and in 1970 it was £923,000. I do not know what it is at the present time but I think it must be well over £1 million. It is a scandalous situation in this country that we have foreigners coming in, particularly in the city of Dublin, building office accommodation with wall-to-wall carpeting, air conditioning and central heating and the Office of Public Works renting them on behalf of Government Departments.
The rent for those buildings is so much per square foot. It is rumoured that speculators are able to get back their money in four years. Irish insurance companies put up this money for the speculators. Why do the Office of Public Works not borrow the money from those people, build the office blocks themselves and cut out the middlemen and the speculators? In 1969 the Minister for Finance stated:
However, on that particular issue I want to tell the Deputy quite frankly that for some time now the Minister for Local Government and myself have been discussing the desirability of our making an announcement that the Government are no longer in the market for new office accommodation.
That statement was made over three years ago. If my figures are right, we are paying over £600,000 per year extra in rents than we paid in 1969.
I should like to know why those particular statements are made by Ministers and why they are not acted on. I should also like to know if there has been any consultation between the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Local Government. Has any notice yet been given to those speculators that the Government are not interested in new office buildings? Could the Office of Public Works not draw up a plan to borrow the money from the finance companies, cut out the middlemen and build those offices? I believe with the expertise, the architects and the engineers that we have in this country we could tackle that problem with success. This would provide work for many of our people who are unemployed and it would at the same time save the taxpayers an enormous amount of money. Today the Parliamentary Secretary stated as regards Leinster House:
The first two items on the list relate to works at Leinster House; viz. the installation of a simultaneous translating system from Irish into English and the provision of a glass screen around the front of the Public Gallery in this Chamber. As I mentioned when introducing last year's estimates, the translating system will be installed during this year's summer recess.
I was Whip for my party when it was agreed to take down the grille around the gallery. Deputy Tully and Deputy Michael Carty were also Whips at that time. I have visited many Parliaments all over the world and I have never seen a grille like the one that was in the gallery at Leinster House at that time. I cannot understand what is wrong with the present panelling. Why is it necessary to remove the present structure? Today the Parliamentary Secretary stated:
I am sure that Deputies will agree with me that the removal of the old grille from the front of the Public Gallery greatly improved the appearance of the Chamber and it is rather a pity to have to replace it now with another structure. Every effort will be made to do a neat job which will detract as little as possible from the appearance of the House.
Are they afraid of CS gas or that somebody will throw a bomb at us? If they want to get at politicians they will get them sooner or later and perhaps sooner than some people might like to think. I think the present structure should not be interfered with. I have never seen any barricade or glass, such as we have here, in other Parliaments I have visited. I should like to know where this was agreed on. I am a member of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges and so is Deputy Tully. I do not think I missed a meeting but I never heard it discussed. Perhaps Deputy Tully heard it discussed.
I am not a member.
It is that committee which gave us this direction.
I am a member of it and I do not think I missed a meeting. I might have missed ten or 15 minutes at a meeting.
It is some time ago.
What exactly is to be put there?
Glass.
Up the whole way?
Yes.
The people will suffocate in it. It is bad enough as it is.
That is what the committee have decided.
Is it bullet-proof glass?
Another glasshouse.
The Parliamentary Secretary should refer this back to the committee.
I have done so. I have tried to resist it.
Refer it back to them now.
This started after the bomb was dropped in the House of Parliament in England.
Some of us would be a small loss.
The Parliamentary Secretary should tell them we do not want the present structures interfered with.
I will get in touch with them again.
That is a couple of thousand saved.
The Deputy can raise it in another place.
Yes, I can raise it at the meeting. We all like to be in Leinster House until we are put out of it. I asked a question the other day regarding the total cost of the improvement works and I was told that the total cost of the improvement work at Leinster House was approximately £772,000 and the cost in relation to the lifts was £16,256. We know that a comprehensive scheme of reconstruction and extension has been carried out. This included the six-storey office block—on which I think most of the money was spent—and the new restaurant and kitchen. The extensive alterations and reconstruction were certainly needed to improve the quality of the accommodation for Deputies, Senators, officials, the Press and the general public. It is agreed that all have benefited from the improvements but there are still some snags. There are complaints about the lifts although the Parliamentary Secretary replied to a question of mine yesterday saying:
I am advised that there are no grounds on which complaints could be raised about the mechanical operation of the lifts.
I believe they are much too slow. A second pair of lifts should be installed in this House. I run up the stairs because it takes less time than waiting for the lifts. In Hawkins House there are lifts which go up 12 floors and one does not have to wait a minute for them. Can anything be done even with the existing lifts to make them move more quickly? I am no engineer or expert but I think something should be done. On a vital vote some time somebody will be caught out. I hope it will be Members of the Government. The sooner that happens the better.
We have an excellent building here now, excellently run. We have a courteous and competent staff from the Superintendent and Captain down. However, there is a waiting room at the Kildare Street gate which is much too small. In wet weather visitors have to stand out in the rain and I think that is unfair. Only one person can go into the waiting room at a time and if the person stands in the doorway he blocks the entrance. The ushers do their best at all times to handle the situation. There is talk of a security risk but I do not see what security risk there could be in an adequate Kildare Street entrance. The room at waiting and interview room at the the Merrion Street gate is even smaller.
There are many complaints made about the heating and the thermostat which governs the heating in Leinster House. Some of us generate our own heat and make it a bit hot at times but the heat seems to vary from floor to floor and, indeed, from room to room. Could the Board of Works do anything to improve the heating and ventilation in the House?
The question of lighter uniforms for the ushers has been raised here. I do not know whether that comes under the Office of Public Works. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle says it does not so I shall pass over it.
Could there be an intercom telephone system installed in the bars, in the restaurant and in certain rooms on certain floors?
Perhaps they would repair the closed circuit television in the restaurant.
These would be matters, in the first instance, for the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. The Office of Public Works are only the agents to carry out the work.
It is only four or five weeks out of order.
That is the first I heard of it. We will have a look at it.
If it is a matter for the committee I shall pass it on to them.
The city of Dublin seems to be becoming lopsided at present. All the new buildings seem to be on the south side. In future, could the Office of Public Works insist that new buildings be sited on the north side? Ballsbridge is becoming the mecca of all prestige buildings. I hope the Office of Public Works will not do anything to encourage that trend. There are many excellent sites on the north side.
In the principal towns of every county there is duplication of public offices. There are social welfare offices, pension offices, land project offices, bovine TB offices, offices of the Department of Lands and so on. The Office of Public Works must maintain these and provide heating, lighting and furniture. A vast amount of money is paid out each year to caretakers, et cetera. Could the Office of Public Works not design a modern office block for each town where all such Departments could be housed? This needs to be done.
I asked the Minister for Finance the amount spent each year by the Office of Public Works for the past five years on various architectural projects to provide new and improved facilities for research, training and advisory services for the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries. I found that the amount is increasing each year. It went from £60,065 in 1967-68 to £185,000 in 1971-72.
However, I believe that not enough is being done in this sector. If we are entering the EEC we need the most up-to-date facilities for research, training and advisory services for the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries. An all-out effort should be made to expedite work in this direction. If there is any construction work to be done by the Office of Public Works this should be done and let us be ready for D-Day, 1st January, 1973.
The Parliamentary Secretary spoke about harbours. Many people are not satisfied with the amount of money spent on harbours, on boat shelters, on the protection given to our fishermen, et cetera. I asked a question about this yesterday and I was referred to an answer that was given to Deputy Blaney on 24-6-71 and 13-4-72. I had not time to look up the Official Report but I know that Deputy Blaney, as a man interested in the fishermen, interested in our coasts and harbours, was certainly not satisfied with the amount of money being spent.
He was not satisfied with the way they were handling his particular harbour, anyway.
He declared there was a big reduction on what was promised a few years ago. It is one direction in which more money could be spent.
I asked a question yesterday about the Roger Casement memorial statue. I was told it has been cast and that the next step is the construction of the pedestal and the inscription of the name on it. This has been delayed. I do not know what has happened but I sincerely hope it will be attended to as quickly as possible.
Today the Parliamentary Secretary spoke about archaeological expeditions at 16 sites financed by the Board of Works in 1971. He said that excavations would continue this year on those sites and on some new sites and he said, of course, that excavations are a necessary preliminary to preservation work. He spoke about a 1965 survey to record scientifically all monuments and said this work will continue this year in counties Westmeath, Longford and Cavan. I am glad something of the sort is being done in Westmeath, Longford and the midlands generally. We all know that the Parliamentary Secretary set up the National Parks and Monuments Branch with the object of enabling the commissioners to coordinate the work in relation to the management of national parks, the preservation of national monuments and the control of navigation on the Shannon. Extra development work in this field is necessary to cater for the increased public demand as the years go by.
On Tuesday last I asked the Parliamentary Secretary, through a question to the Minister for Finance, the number of national parks for which the Board of Works are responsible, where they are located and the total acreage. I was glad to find out that the Bourn Vincent Memorial Park in Killarney comprises 11,007 acres. The Derrynane National Park, also in Kerry, has 314 acres. Of course the second biggest park is the Phoenix Park in Dublin containing 1,752 acres and there are other parks whose sizes range from 22 acres to 40 acres. Any money spent on the improvement, extension and establishment of new parks is well spent. They are show spots for visitors and can be a source of pleasure to our own people.
I am glad to learn that the Board of Works intend to proceed with the establishment of further national parks. I suggest that if possible we should have such a park in every county to which our people could go in summer and autumn evenings after work in factories, offices and shops, and at weekends now that the five-day week is so general. I am afraid we are not doing enough in regard to the provision of pleasure grounds where our people can relax during their leisure hours. As I said, I would be in favour of having a park in every county to which boys and girls could go, where games could be played, where children could be kept off the streets and, indeed, out of publichouses. The devil finds work for idle lands and in parks of the kind I have been speaking about young people can play games and relax.
Last year the Parliamentary Secretary spoke about the opening up of nature trails and pony treks in our parks. This is a desirable development and as our people become more wealthy there is an increasing demand for pony riding. I should like to know if the pony treks in the Killarney park have been a success.
In 1970 the Parliamentary Secretary announced plans for the Derrynane National Park. It contains some of the most beautiful scenery in the world. I visited it last year and was delighted to see so many tourists from Europe and all over the world so fascinated by the scenery. I had one sobering thought, though: 95 per cent of those I met in the park were from abroad. It is a pity more of our own people do not visit such parks and see the beauty of those parks which are being so well maintained by the Board of Works. The sanctuary in about 20 acres of swamp feasibility of establishing a wild fowl was considered last year and there were some plans for a water garden. Last Tuesday the Parliamentary Secretary, in reply to a question, said progress is being made on these projects. It is a very good idea. We have a lot of swampland on which the Board of Works could develop sanctuaries and pleasure grounds. I congratulate the Board of Works for what they have been doing in this direction.
I have some complaints in regard to the Phoenix Park. I have been told that the Office of Public Works do not maintain some of their Gaelic, soccer and hockey pitches as they should be kept. Some of the pitches contain dips and hollows and a lot of re-sodding is required. It is a matter the Board of Works should attend to without delay. There was to be an arrangement to lay out an area exclusively for the blind and I should like to know if anything has been done in that respect. I was glad to hear, in reply to a question yesterday, that it is proposed to invite tenders in a few months time for the laying out of a children's playground in the people's garden in the park. There has not been any expenditure to date on this project.
In regard to the proposed golf course there, many people objected to it being in the Phoenix Park itself because it would be an encroachment on space there and I am glad to hear that a proposal has been brought forward to have the course in the Inchicore North and Long Meadows Estate. There is a demand for this and I hope the Board of Works will expedite the work. I should like to deal with the Shannon for pleasure because I believe the Office of Public Works——
I wonder does the Deputy mean that.
There is the Shannon for arterial drainage purposes and the Shannon for pleasure, or as a pleasure resort, or whatever one might like to call it. The commissioners have a special responsibility in regard to the Shannon as a recreational waterway. The river can afford an extensive and a wide range of recreational and scenic attractions.
I also put down a question about that and I was glad to learn that expenditure on the maintenance and management of Shannon navigation for the past five years was: in 1967-68, £31,746; in 1968-69, £39,970; in 1969-70, £38,935; in 1970-71, £57,262 and in 1971-72, £73,205. The total amount of private investment was not available but £2,150,000 was put up between private individuals and Bord Fáilte. I think the greater part of that sum was put up by private individuals. It is good to see this expenditure. The commissioners and all concerned are to be complimented on the excellent work that has been done there. The commissioners co-operated fully with Bord Fáilte, the local authorities and private individuals in the development and promotion of the Shannon as a recreational waterway. The immense potential of the Shannon as a recreational centre cannot be over-estimated. From the national point of view its location lends urgency to its full development, not because it happens to run through a large part of my constituency, although that may have a little bearing on it.
The Parliamentary Secretary told us on a previous occasion that the commissioners began an archaeological survey which has recorded scientifically virtually all monuments up to 1200 AD. On that they are to be congratulated. He also informed us that the survey had been extended into Counties Cavan, Westmeath and Longford. He said:
From this survey we expect to record some 150,000 to 200,000 separate archaeological items for the whole country.
In reply to a question yesterday I was informed that the Office of Public Works have responsibility in various degrees under the National Monuments Act for over 1,000 monuments or groups of monuments.
I should like to mention some aspects of the national monuments and field antiquities, grave slabs or memorial slabs. Grave slabs are relics of the early Christian monasteries. The slabs were usually flat stones with an inscribed cross and an inscription asking prayers for the persons buried beneath. There are a great number of types of grave stones and an endless variety of crosses on them. The best selection of grave slabs is to be seen at Clonmacnoise. They have been mounted in a sectioned wall forming part of a well-planned gallery at the entrance to the enclosure. This work, in which the slabs are exhibited in groups denoting the various types of grave stones used from the 8th century to the 11th or 12th century, was carred out by the Office of Public Works.
It is only right to point out that not all grave slabs are as well preserved as those at Clonmacnoise. In a number of smaller sites in the midlands some grave slabs are in danger of being lost or broken up. The Office of Public Works should take possession of them as quickly as possible and have them preserved in the same way as those at Clonmacnoise, Durrow, Fuerty in County Roscommon and Gallen in Offaly.
With regard to ring forts, although the general term "fort" covers a large number of differing types of structure, in nearly all cases the ráth, lios or dún is taken to mean a fort which served a domestic rather than a military purpose. My home county of Westmeath is very rich in ring forts, but they are disappearing at an alarming rate because of land reclamation, road construction and general development. Ring forts are in particular danger of being destroyed where they occur on the lands of well-to-do farmers because they can afford to carry out improvement work privately and without any Government subvention. Consequently, as there is no official inspection, no official record is made of any ring forts, earthworks, burial mounds or other field antiquities.
The Office of Public Works have carried out no excavations on ring forts in Westmeath since Professor McAlister's excavations at Uisneach in the thirties. In Longford a ring fort was excavated by Mr. Liam de Paor fairly recently at Ardagh. It is interesting to note that considerable numbers of excavations of ring forts were carried out in the Six Counties during 1971 by the Historic Monuments Branch of the Ministry of Finance: I think seven in all. The availability of the bulldozer for farm improvements, road developments, housing schemes, factories and car parks, has alerted all concerned to the necessity of excavating and recording as much data as possible before the earthworks are completely destroyed.
The Office of Public Works in the Twenty-six Counties are equally alert, we must admit. During 1971 they excavated two ring forts, a hill fort in County Kildare and also a hill fort in County Wicklow. Any person with a ring fort on his land should have to get permission from the Office of Public Works before he bulldozes it. A certain number of the most distinctive ring forts should be preserved in each county and only the Office of Public Works are in a position to do that. I would request the board to put Westmeath next on their list for the selective excavation of ring forts.
Donore Castle is one of the finest examples in the country of the single towered, fortified residences known as tower houses or £10 houses. Many of these were built from around 1450 to 1600 and the £10 house was the result of a statute of Henry VI in 1429 which states:
It is agreed and asserted that every hege-man or Our Lord the King of the said counties (Dublin, Meath, Kildare and Louth, counties of the Pale) who chooses to build a castle or tower sufficiently embattled or fortified within the next ten years to wit twenty feet in length, sixteen feet in width, and forty feet in height or more, that the commons of the said counties shall pay to the said person to build the said castle or tower ten pounds by way of subsidy.
Donore was part of the Mac Geoghegan country and the castle featured both during the Cromwellian wars and those of 1691. The last representative of the Mac Geoghegans of Donore was Sir Richard Nagle, MP for Westmeath. He died in 1850. He was second cousin once removed of the celebrated Nano Nagle. The castle was lived in by other families since then and was, indeed, occupied until quite recently by the late Mr. Galvin It is now owned by his son but as it is no longer lived in, it is deteriorating as time goes on.
I would ask the board to consider negotiating with the owner for the taking over of Donore Castle by the board, and for preserving it and designating it as a national monument. I would urge them to do this as quickly as possible. The Parliamentary Secretary mentioned that economic growth, social progress and development resulted too often in the neglect or destruction of monuments of unique interest and antiquity and that they depended on the goodwill of the owners of lands on which they are situated. Certain voluntary organisations such as An Taisce are doing excellent work in this sphere at present. Great credit is due to them for that. In County Westmeath, for example, An Taisce, under the chairmanship of Mr. John H. Keegan, spent three weekends at the ancient village of Fore where they removed ivy from tombs and buildings, and pointed and repainted the masonry both inside and outside the buildings. The Office of Public Works have agreed to assume responsibility for the future maintenance of these monuments. This body of dedicated workers have divided the county into small units and items of archaeological or historical interest have been tabulated. Also, when they are notified about planning permission applications, they determine whether the granting of such permission would result in spoiling the landscape in any way. In this regard I am glad to say that they are getting full co-operation from the majority of farmers and any other people who wish to erect new buildings. They visit houses of historic interest and advise the owners against any unnecessary alteration. They endeavour, too, to prevent the cutting down of mature timber if such action would spoil a landscape. In this as in their other efforts they have been receiving the co-operation of the local people.
Plans have now been prepared by An Taisce for the cleaning of the canal at Mullingar and they are awaiting permission from CIE to have this work done.
Perhaps the only criticism I can make regarding this Estimate is in respect of arterial drainage. This is because we are not spending enough money on this work. Arterial drainage provides much employment as well as improving the land generally and thereby improving greatly the income of those farmers whose lands were being flooded. Now that we are entering the Common Market the Government should double, if not treble, the amount of money they are allotting for this work. It is a retrograde step to have a cut-back on spending of this nature. We must remember that a worker who was receiving about £8 10s in 1965 is now receiving about £22 per week. He is entitled to that but when one takes into consideration this increased cost in labour and also increased costs in materials as well as devaluation of money, it will be seen that we could not do now much more than half the amount of work that was being done in 1965 on the money that is being granted. I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to impress on the Government the necessity for spending on arterial drainage three or four times the amount being spent now.
Arterial drainage began in 1948 with the Brosna catchment scheme. On the 16th May, 1972, I tabled a question regarding expenditure on arterial drainage. From the reply I note that the amount of money spent on this work in 1963 was £1,875,301, that in 1964-65 it was £1,874,588 and that the amount for 1971-72 was £1,901,895. It will be realised that, taking into account depreciation in the value of money and the increased costs of labour and materials, we would need to spend £4 million now in order to have executed the same amount of work as was carried out in 1963-64.
On the 18th of November, 1971, the Parliamentary Secretary said, in reply to a question, that the percentage of the capital budget allowed for arterial drainage has been diminishing consistently during the years. The sooner the Government realises how retrograde a step is this cutting back, the better.
The draining of the Shannon is a matter that has occupied the minds of most of us for a long time. A full report regarding the problem of the flooding of this river was submitted on the 20th of August, 1966. This was a report compiled by Mr. Louis Rydell of the US Corps of Engineers and in a report dated the 6th June, 1971, which was compiled by the joint efforts of the Office of Public Works and the ESB, it was pointed out that there was much hardship being caused to people living in the vicinity of the Shannon because of the flooding of lands. However, nothing has been done regarding this problem since these reports were published although promises to have the work carried out have been made at every general and by-election during the past 20 years. It is unfair to mislead those people whose cattle contract disease because of this flooding. Many of them told me they would have left long ago were it not for the fact that so many promises were made about draining the Shannon. It is unfair to mislead those people or to mislead any section of the people in that regard.
It does show what certain members of this Government are prepared to do to get votes. In Deputy Joan Burke's by-election I remember the heading in the paper of that day. In Deputy John Donnellan's by-election I remember the promises that were made from every platform in County Galway. Again, I remember the 1969 general election, when the photograph of the Minister for Transport and Power, Deputy Lenihan, appeared in the Westmeath Independent and the Roscommon Herald with glaring headlines: “Shannon now to be drained.” Unfortunately for the people living along the banks of the Shannon, the Shannon waters still flow out into their fields flooding them the very same as they did 20 years ago.
Yesterday I put a question to the Minister which the Parliamentary Secretary answered to the effect that the preparation of plans for a number of arterial drainage schemes, including that for the River Shannon catchment area, "has been deferred pending receipt of the report on the cost/benefit study mentioned in the statement". I wonder do the Board of Works take into consideration the cost to the people who are flooded and the little benefit these people are getting from their land. I wonder will the Minister. Deputy Lenihan, the Parliamentary Secretary, Deputy Kitt, or any other Fianna Fáil Deputy now face the people in the west and tell them that the drainage of the Shannon is not even contemplated until we receive the above-mentioned report. If they have not got the money let them tell the people so, but let them not fool the people any longer, because this is something on which money should be spent and spent immediately.
While I am dealing with arterial drainage I want to mention the complaint from farmers in regard to the spreading of the spoil. I entirely agree that engineers and foremen have great difficulty in arranging how to spread the spoil so that it will not harm the land of local farmers. There should be closer co-operation between engineers, the county council and the Office of Public Works so that rocks blasted from river beds which are now causing such a nuisance on the lands of many farmers could be used in road-mending, road-making and the filling in of quarry holes and so on. Much good land has been ruined by spoil lying on it, and it is unsightly as well. The Parliamentary Secretary should take up this question with the Minister for Local Government and advise local authorities to organise the removal of the spoil at a nominal cost. It is useless for the Office of Public Works to spend huge sums on draining land in order to improve it if at the same time they destroy many other acres of land by having the spoil spread on it. I have seen county councils drawing sand and stones four and five miles to within 100 yards of where there were heaps of spoil that could have been got for little or nothing.
I thoroughly agree with the Deputy.
I cannot understand that, and, perhaps, the Board of Works will take up the matter with the Department of Local Government. I intend to say very little about the land drainage scheme because I am sure Deputy Tully will be speaking on it. However, to show the good that can be done by drainage and the harm that can be done by flooding, I shall just mention some figures in connection with the Boyne scheme. The area of land in the catchment subject to flooding is 112,000 acres of agricultural land and 26,000 acres of bogland. That means, taking an average farm, that the land of 400 to 500 people is flooded by the Boyne river at present. When you multiply that by the number of other catchment areas in the country, including the Shannon, you will see the enormous amount of good agricultural land which has been ruined through flooding and which could be vastly improved if more money was spent on arterial drainage.
We are told that the scheme will benefit 93,000 acres of agricultural land. Farmers have shown me land along the Boyne which they said 20 years ago could grow an excellent crop of wheat or barley and on which there was grazing for cattle and sheep, and now it is flooded for six to eight months of the year. If they put cattle or sheep out on it there is the danger that they will get fluke. This land is very highly valued and the people are probably paying up to £5 an acre rates on it. The Board of Works instead of doing one large scheme at a time, should put three or four in operation.
The cost of maintenance is estimated at £27,000 a year. There is a statutory demand made on the county council for maintenance each year. This places a heavy burden on already overburdened ratepayers. This is one demand that should be removed from the ratepayers of the different counties and made a national charge. I would ask the Board of Works to exercise whatever influence they have with the Department of Local Government and the Department of Finance to see that this charge, which in Westmeath, in connection with the drainage of the Brosna and the Inny, now amounts to 40p or 45p in the £, is transferred from the rates to the Exchequer.
The duration of the construction work is given as ten years. An all out effort should be made to halve that time. With more men and machinery it could be reduced to five years and that would help to solve some of the unemployment problem. Would it not be better to pay these people for working rather than pay them social welfare? They are entitled to their social welfare but why not increase that figure of £13 million to the 1966-67 figure of £18 million and help to put our people back to work? That would be money well spent. If the land were drained it would benefit the agricultural economy and ultimately the whole country. I am surprised that there is a reduction in the amount being spent on arterial drainage. The priorities are wrong. They should be revised as quickly as possible because any money spent on arterial drainage will pay a dividend.
Items 48 and 52 deal with the first stages of the new office premises for the staffs of the Departments of Education and Lands at Athlone and Castlebar respectively: "It is expected that tenders for construction work will be invited towards the end of the year." We have heard this for the last two or three years. It must be all of five or six years ago since the hopes of the people in Athlone and Castlebar were raised because they were told that the Department of Lands was going to Castlebar and the Department of Education to Athlone. We believe in decentralisation but it is ridiculous to talk about decentralisation when the Sugar Company a few years ago built an enormous block in Dublin, a block which could have been erected in Athlone or in some other part of the country.
On last Tuesday I asked the Minister a question:
To ask the Minister for Finance (a) the total expenditure to date by the Office of Public Works due to the Government's decision to transfer the Departments of Education and Lands to Athlone and Castlebar; (b) the amount expended on (i) sites and (ii) consultants' and other fees; (c) when work will commence in Athlone and Castlebar; and (d) the estimated cost of (i) Athlone and (ii) Castlebar buildings.
I was told that the total expenditure to date was £71,333 and, of this amount, £28,470 was expended on site acquisition and £41,314 on consultant and other fees. I was told: "It is expected that construction work on the first stage of both projects will commence in about 12 months time." Yesterday, the Minister said 12 months and now the Parliamentary Secretary says towards the end of the year. "The estimated cost of the complete building scheme for Athlone is £1,250,000 and for Castlebar £1,650,000." I was not satisfied with the Parliamentary Secretary's answer and I questioned him further and he told me that the original intention was to transfer the entire Departments in one operation but now it is proposed to do it in parts. We were not given that information until last Tuesday. The Parliamentary Secretary further replied:
The Office of Public Works have been asked to revise the plans.
Why have they been asked to revise the plans and why were we not told about this until I asked a question? Why did the Parliamentary Secretary say nothing about it in his opening speech? Had I not asked the supplementary question I did all we would have before us would be:
The provisions here are for the first stages of new office premises for staffs of the Departments of Education and Lands at Athlone and Castlebar respectively.
Now, according to the Minister, only part of the Department of Education will be transferred to Athlone and only part of the Department of Lands to Castlebar. The Government should tell the people exactly what they intend to do. If it has taken six years to get as far as this first stage, how long will it take before these Departments are finally decentralised?
In the past I have been very critical of certain aspects of the Office of Public Works and, in particular, of the labour relations section. I take this opportunity now of saying how glad I am that the position has improved and that it is now possible to get a good and courteous service from the labour relations people. It is only fair that I should say this now because I have been so critical of them in the past. It is also only fair to say that the officials generally have been most courteous. When the Parliamentary Secretary was first appointed there was a belief that he would not, perhaps, do so well. This has not been the case. He has been most anxious to help and when he is asked to do something he makes every effort to do it, perhaps not always to one's satisfaction, but it is nice to know that someone does try. Naturally I disagree with some of the things he has done, but that does not take away from the fact that he has been invariably courteous and that he and his officials do their best in the light of the regulations under which they operate.
Deputy L'Estrange covered a very wide field indeed, so wide that it is difficult to know where to start, or what to mention and what to omit. I congratulate Deputy L'Estrange on doing a very good job, but I do not think I will follow the pattern he set and cover such a wide field.
Under subhead E there is provision for £5,000 for a simultaneous translating system in the Dáil. This is not money well spent and I am sure Deputy Kitt, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the Gaeltacht, will agree with that. Very, very little Irish is used in this House. That is, perhaps, a pity, but so little is used that the expenditure of this £5,000 is nothing so much as very bad housekeeping at a time when money is very short. It is just too bad that in this House of Parliament it should be necessary to spend £5,000 on a translating system to enable people in the House to understand what is said in their own language. I was in India and there they have six main languages and 156 dialects. What would happen, I wonder, if we were in the same position as India? This is not a gesture to the language. It is not money well spent.
The Deputy has a Gaeltacht in his constituency.
Agus tá beagán Gaeilge agam. Bhí mé im chónaí in aice leis an Ghaeltacht sin ar feadh fiche bliain. As far as the provision of the glass screen around the Public Gallery in Leinster House is concerned I think this is absolutely ridiculous. This was a panic measure suggested when somebody threw CS gas into the British House of Commons. Having taken down the old grille which was there for many years and which I understand was erected because some irate lady threw a bundle of leaflets into the House at one time many years ago to replace what is there now is ridiculous. We are not being adult. I am aware that the Committee on Procedure and Privileges suggested something like this many years ago. I think the matter should be referred back to them. We should not spend £5,000 doing something absolutely unnecessary. If somebody wants to throw something down here I imagine a glass screen would not prevent them. It looks well as it is and should be left that way. I would also fear that if glass were put up and if there was a crowd there for a period it would be extremely warm; even as it is now, it is rather oppressive. I commented before on the fact that there is only one outlet. I believe there is another one if somebody could find the key. Whenever there is to be a fire somebody should notify the authorities a week or so beforehand so that the key can be found because I understand the door is locked and it would not be possible to get out. This is the sort of nonsense on which the £10,000 there should not be spent.
I suppose the automatic fire detection system for the State Apartments is necessary in view of the fact that a fire occurred in Iveagh House. I presume that is the reason why we have this provision. Would an automatic fire detection system have prevented the Iveagh House fire? I do not think so. Again, we are spending a good deal of money about which—I am not an expert and cannot say whether it is right or wrong—I am doubtful.
While I remember it, there is the question of the spending of over £3 million on the Kennedy Memorial Hall. If an effort had been made to do something about this immediately after the assassination of President Kennedy there would be a great deal of public sympathy but things have happened in America since which to some extent have changed people's minds here. President Kennedy is a long time dead and his brother was assassinated since then. I do not think now that the erection of a memorial hall to President Kennedy is worth £3 million of taxpayers' money. I believe such a hall is needed in Dublin when we have the money for it but I do not think now is the time.
This is another little sham which could be shelved and left until such time as it can be more appropriately considered. There is no point in giving the impression that these things will be done and that they are of urgent importance. The one severe criticism I make of the Board of Works generally is that whoever is directing policy has not got the priorities right. Speaking as an ordinary layman my point of view may differ very much from that of experts in various fields but as I represent the ordinary people I believe that before substantial sums of money are spent there should be an assessment of priorities. A number of items listed for substantial sums of money here would not take No. 1 place on my priority list.
There is also the question of the improvement of certain buildings for the Department of Finance including the buildings which house the Revenue Commissioners and their officials. This is long overdue. I would give them a very much higher priority. It galls me every time I go to any of the income tax offices to find that not alone are they short of space for filing but of space for standing. There is not room to sit down in the offices, no room to interview anybody in most of them and air conditioning does not exist. In some cases there are two queues of people standing shoulder to shoulder awaiting interview and you could have next door neighbours making their "confessions" through a grille side by side to some little girl who is very anxious to do what should be done. The conditions under which they work are too bad. A substantial amount of money is being spent here. I notice the accommodation for the computer will cost £250,000 of which £100,000 is being spent this year while in one place, Aras Brugha, £21,500 is to be spent of which £1,000 is being provided this year.
In another case the expenditure will be £25,000 and £15,000 is being provided for this year. Nobody will complain if an effort is made to move these staffs to decent offices or substantially improve the existing accommodation. In some cases the only privacy the senior staff have is at the end of a room curtained off by a row of filing cabinets. Nobody else in the Government service at their level would tolerate this. This is all wrong: these people are handling a vast amount of money and doing a good job and they are being asked to work in almost impossible conditions. We all swear when we have to complain about tax free allowances not being sent out but I believe the people doing the job must have the patience of Job to do it under their present conditions.
In happier surroundings they might be easier on the taxpayers.
They certainly might. An improvement is being made but I do not think it has got the priority it should have or that the amount of money is sufficient.
I see that a sum of £380,000 is to be provided for the fitting out of a new office block. Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary would let us know what this new office block is and what fitting out is involved. This is information which he probably has in his brief and could easily give us.
I think the Ordnance Survey Office is not being treated fairly and not getting a chance to bring their mapping up to date. Again, money could be well spent here and nobody would quarrel with it. The office provides a useful service. There is provision for the spending of £40,000 out of £135,000 on new Government offices in Drogheda. I should like more information about this. What offices is it proposed to house in this building? There is a sum of £3,000 provided for an inscription on the back wall of the Garden of Remembrance. I do not believe that the people who died for Ireland in 1916 would worry very much if there was not an inscription costing £3,000 there. Again, we are spending money which I do not think is really necessary. If we talk about priorities. I do not think this is a top priority.
The Garden of Remembrance cost a substantial amount of money. The State memorial to the late President Kennedy was estimated to cost nearly £4 million. A sum of £117,000 has been spent. What was that spent on? It is proposed to spend another £5,000. This is something which should be shelved. It is not necessary expenditure.
It may be necessary to do something about St. Enda's in Rathfarnham. It should be preserved. It is costing a lot of money. The restoration of the Royal Hospital, Kilmainham, will cost £20,000 this year. Is the restoration of the Royal Hospital more important than providing proper quarters for Government staff? This is a question of priorities. The removal of the temporary car ferry terminal at Dún Laoghaire has to be carried out. The restoration of the picture gallery wing at Kilkenny Castle is mentioned. This work was not carried out when Deputy Gibbons was Parliamentary Secretary. It may be a worthwhile project, but £20,000 is rather a lot of money to spend there.
There are some points which I would like to query with regard to the technical bureau improvements at the Garda headquarters. The estimated total cost is £26,000. Last year £19,000 was spent. A sum of £4,000 is provided for here. Why is it necessary to carry over the relatively small sum of £3,000? A sum of £10,000 is also proposed for improved accommodation for the Commissioner's staff. Out of a total of £647,000 to be spent on the Garda training centre at Templemore £640,000 was spent and it is proposed to spend £2,000 now leaving a balance of £5,000. What is being done? I wonder is the money to be spent on the ballalley or the swimming pool this time?
A sum of £180,000 is provided for the erection of new Garda stations. This is an excellent idea. I was glad to hear the Minister for Justice saying that he is not going to close any more Garda stations. A big mistake was made in areas where the population was growing in attempting to provide services with one squad car, instead of having gardaí who knew people intimately in each area. Money is provided for the provision of alternative accommodation for gardaí personnel at Dublin Castle. This accommodation is very badly needed. I am intrigued by the provision of £4,000 for accommodation for female clerical assistants in Garda stations. These female assistants are taking over from gardaí who were doing the job. This is right. What is the necessity for £4,000? Is there any particular reason for it?
A sum of £7,000 is provided for houses for married members of the Garda Síochána. What relation would that have to houses? It may represent interest being paid, because £7,000 would not provide much additional accommodation. A decent house in a country district would cost £7,000.
There is a sum of £40,000 for new offices in Athlone. The Government should stop codding themselves. I do not think there is any prospect of the Department of Education moving to Athlone, or of the Department of Lands moving to Castlebar. I am not blaming the present Minister for this. These moves were suggested at a time when they suited the people who occupied those Ministries. The Minister for Lands was a man from County Louth but it would be ridiculous to have him in charge of an organisation with headquarters in Castlebar. Is it not true that the existing staffs in the Departments of Education and Lands have indicated that they had no intention whatever of moving to either Castlebar or Athlone? Is that not really the cause of the trouble? If something like this is to be done a small, token section will eventually find themselves moved while the main group will remain in Dublin. These people, no matter what salary or wages they are receiving, are just workers who depend on wages and salaries from the Departments and many of them have bought or built houses for themselves and their families and have children at schools or working in jobs around the city. There would be a complete break-up of their social life if they were moved from Dublin.
Would the Deputy not agree that this is a matter not for the Parliamentary Secretary, but for another Minister?
The Parliamentary Secretary was foolish enough to mention it specifically in his brief.
The Parliamentary Secretary mentioned the amount of money sanctioned for the various buildings, but the policy of changing the Departments is not one for him to decide.
I would hope that the £40,000 mentioned could be spent on something higher up on the priority list. I have made my point. It would be wrong for anybody speaking on this Estimate to let it pass without comment. Deputy L'Estrange dealt with it at length, quite correctly.
We come now to grants for national school buildings. The Government are not spending enough. They propose to spend £4 million. When they are building a national school no one ever seems to go to the trouble of estimating the likely growth of population in the area within a few years. National schools are built at a certain cost to house the existing population, but in at least six cases of which I know before the schools were finished they were too small and additional classrooms were added around the school yards. The Office of Public Works should discuss this point with the Department of Education. This subject can also be dealt with when speaking on the Estimate for the Department of Education.
I have already referred to the £40,000 for the new offices in Castlebar. The money which is referred to in regard to agriculture and fisheries is money which will be well spent. There appears to be some peculiar arrangement that all the money provided is not being used in any particular year. The estimated total cost for the regional veterinary and dairy produce laboratories was £202,500. Expenditure to March, 1972 is £176,000. £30,000 is to be provided this year. I would calculate that as £206,000, taking into account the estimated expenditure to 31st March, 1972. We appear to have gone over the estimate there, whereas in a few other cases less money was spent than was provided for. The estimated cost of the new post mortem unit at Abbotstown is £30,000. It appears that £27,000 was spent last year and a further £2,000 will be spent this year. Why is this? Why is there a balance of £1,000? I will not quarrel about the money spent for this purpose. Agricultural experimenting is something which was neglected for a number of years. The people now engaged in it are doing an excellent job and should get every encouragement and whatever money is necessary.
I am interested in item 62—provision of storage accommodation for departmental records. An estimate has not yet been made. The provision is £25,000. An explanation is required. Is there a new building being erected or is it proposed to photostat records and to condense them and have them properly stored? We all know that records multiply and that it is very difficult to keep an up-to-date filing system. I would be interested to know how the Department propose to deal with records by providing £25,000. If there is some system that can be provided for £25,000, other Departments would be entitled to the same service.
There is a provision of £2,000 for a new meteorological station at Mullingar. Is this the one that we had the discussion about some years ago in connection with which there was difficulty with a water supply? If so, has the problem been solved?
There are a number of items under Posts and Telegraphs. One is Black-rock post office: modernisation— £2,000. Then there is Dundrum: computer buildings, £55,000. It is not enough to put down an estimate of £70,000 for computer buildings, whatever that may be, and then put down £55,000, and leave it at that. We should know what is proposed. Is the building alone £55,000 or is some equipment being added? In regard to the engineering training centre at Dundrum the provision of £2,000 is very small unless it is merely a question of a site. The provision for the Glenageary sorting office is very welcome. The estimated expenditure to 31st March, 1972, was £14,000 out of £55,000 and there is provision for a further £28,000 this year. Is the balance likely to be required? In other words, when is the building likely to be finished? The longer it runs, the higher the cost. The cost increases by 4 per cent or 5 per cent every six months. It is possible that there will be an additional sum for this purpose in next year's Estimate.
There is a provision of £10,000 for Harmonstown sorting office and a provision of £23,000 for Phibsboro post office extension. There is a provision of £5,000 for St. John's Road depot: warehouses, et cetera.
Would the Minister say whether or not provision is being made for the sorting office at Store Street? This is the one that caused all the rows in this House. According to a promise given by the Minister a dust extractor was to be installed this year. Provision for this does not appear on the Estimate. I assume it has been put on the méar fhada. Would the Parliamentary Secretary be able to say what exactly has happened? There is no use in the Minister saying that the matter will be looked after and then leaving it at that. That means that there will be another row.
In regard to the Cavan new post office, which is almost finished, there is a gap. The estimated total cost was £77,000; the estimated expenditure on 31st March, 1972, was £64,000 and the provision for this year is £5,000. Where is the missing sum? There may be a pattern which I do not understand.
I am glad to see that it has been decided to spend a little money on the Donegal new post office—£3,000. The estimated expenditure on 31st March, 1972, was £250. I suppose these amounts refer to the site.
In respect of the Mullingar new post office the amount is £6,500, including the £5,000 being provided this year. New offices are very badly needed. Why does it take so long to provide them? Is it decided one year to build a post office and the next year to acquire the site and the next year to draw up plans and so on? Is there a pattern of four or five years?
Under the heading of Defence I notice Parkgate Street: alterations— £3,000. With the £3,000 last year, that makes a total of £6,000, leaving a balance of £2,000. I take it that this is the old building formerly known as SDOL. Is there no further money being expended by the Board of Works for the Department of Defence? Surely there must be new buildings being erected? If not I should like to know the reason why.
Under the heading of Foreign Affairs there is an item for the Ottawa Embassy: extension and improvement —£5,000. I suppose that is a reasonable thing. I am interested in item 83: Brussels EEC Mission: fitting out new offices—£25,000, with a balance of £2,000. What exactly is "fitting out"? Obviously these are rented offices. What is being put in for £25,000? It cannot be very much. If the Kildare Place building is costing a couple of hundred thousand, I wonder what will be got for £25,000 in Brussels.
Item 84 is minor new works not exceeding £5,000. I always think of this as petty cash but when the petty cash goes into £100,000 it is not sufficient to refer to them as minor new works not exceeding £5,000. More detail is called for.
Item 85 is urgent and unforeseen works—£5,000 and then there is an item, balances of expenditure—£45,000. What is "balances of expenditure"? I should like to know. I had complaints about other Departments doing this and that is why I make the point.
I am glad to know that the Minister hopes to be able to spend money on Tara this year. There is a Supreme Court action. I made my view known here before. From the time that the late Donogh O'Malley announced that the State proposed to buy Tara, a mistake has been made by the State in regarding Tara as agricultural land. Tara is a very important national monument. There is another Tara which is costing a great deal of money because of the fact that it was not merely agricultural land. Tara is an important place in the country. The owner of the land is not a supporter of mine and I am not making any case for him but he is perfectly justified in claiming something over the odds. The price for this land should not be based on the price of adjoining agricultural land. I am not attempting to alter the decision of the court but I am making the point that the State has been unnecessarily parsimonious about this. This question should have been settled years ago and could have been settled if a fair amount had been offered to the owner. If this had been done we would have been able to develop Tara.
There is a little church beside Tara that is not used very much. From the air Tara looks impressive. One can identify where the original buildings were. On the ground, apart from a disreputable statue of St. Patrick, there is no distinguishing mark. It is too bad that we should talk so much about the history of Tara while doing nothing to mark it. There were excavations carried out a few years ago and there were a number of geological finds. These have been abandoned. There remains a hole where digging took place.
What about the local respect of the people in the area? One would think that they would provide some monument to mark it. Are they waiting for the Government?
The State is the only body that can do anything. There is a group called the Tara Restoration Group, or something like that. I am not a member of it. It is a small, tightly-knit group. They raised a certain amount of money some years ago but they feel unable to do anything because the State says that the matter is before the courts. Everybody, including the county council, is anxious to assist in every possible way. An effort should be made to finalise the matter this year. When the late Donogh O'Malley was Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance he announced that it would be made a national monument. That is some years ago but nothing has been done since. There are a number of other monuments there. Newgrange has had some work done on it but there is still a lot to be done there. It is a very big tourist attraction. Knowth and Dowth, which are very close to it, have not been developed so far.
The Parliamentary Secretary, in relation to the Shannon, stated that a cost/benefit analysis is being carried out before a decision is taken. I do not quarrel with that decision but if this is done I would get the impression that it is being used as a ploy not to do anything with the Shannon. If a cost/benefit analysis is being carried out one important factor which is overlooked very often by the gentlemen who do this sort of thing is the question of what it will cost the State, if it is not carried out, apart entirely from what benefit would accrue to landholders in the area and other interests.
The matter to which Deputy L'Estrange referred briefly is the question of the number of people who were gainfully employed on the job who would otherwise be unemployed and drawing unemployment benefit, what this is likely to be over a period and what the results, taken from the overall costs, will be, where it fits in. This is something which is being overlooked again and again. When we talk about a cost/benefit analysis in every case the question of employment or unemployment must be taken into account plus social welfare payments for stamps plus income tax. It is the easiest thing in the world to assess what that is likely to be and put that on one side because that is a tangible figure which can be sorted out and set off against any alleged loss.
I should like to think that we might draw from the regional development fund in the EEC.
The Parliamentary Secretary should be informed about this by now. I should like to give him the facts some time. There is no regional development fund in the EEC. I do not want to fight the referendum again. Unfortunately, this will only be brought home to people in the years to come. I would prefer if this was not so. It is rather stupid to refer to something in the House from which the Parliamentary Secretary cannot gain anything now, and he must know it does not exist.
The Deputy will wake up some day and find it does.
We must go to sleep first and then wake up.
If the Parliamentary Secretary spent as much time trying to find these things out in Europe as I did he would know that this fund does not exist.
Some people were asleep during the referendum campaign.
Some alarm clock is being wound.
The referendum is over and we are prepared to accept the decision of the Irish people. It is rather a pity this was not always the system in this country because it would have saved us a lot of trouble. Let us leave it at that now.
We will go back to Tara.
"The harp that once—"
Quite an amount of money is being spent on the Boyne. I believe it is money well spent. It does not matter whether a cost/benefit analysis was carried out before work was started on the Boyne because I think it could have stood up to it. There will be a fantastic improvement in land around there. Again, to come back to a question which I referred to before, that is the maintenance cost. The maintenance cost over all of County Meath particularly—the other counties will be affected in a smaller way—because of the fact that there is so much of the Boyne flowing through the county, will be very high. I seriously suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that the time has come when the State must bear the responsibility for that. Moneys have been mentioned here as being made available for maintenance but, of course, we know that the maintenance cost comes directly from the rates in each county. While costs are mentioned in the Parliamentary Secretary's Estimate there is a drawback when the money is refunded.
The people who will benefit substantially will pay rates, even though they complain but the people who live in a town 20 to 40 miles away and who cannot benefit by it will have a genuine complaint when they have to pay rates for this. They should not have to pay this money. I will not say that money grows on trees but money has to be found for this. It is not easy to get ratepayers, with the rise in rates generally, to accept that they have to pay for something which does not do them any good. If this Government do not do something about this, I imagine that some Government in the future will have to face up to their responsibilities.
There have been complaints about the way spoil has been thrown around and land ruined by the misuse of it. The people who are doing the work on the Boyne are doing their best to see that too much land is not ruined by it. It has reached the stage where some new system will have to be adopted rather than dumping spoil on somebody's land. Over the years the fellow with a few acres of land always seemed to have a lot of spoil put on it while the man with 500 or 600 acres did not seem to complain. It probably did not matter to him if half an acre of land was ruined. The material which comes from the bottom of the river is not of much use unless clay is put on top of it. If it is spread around the fields it will spoil growth. Deputy L'Estrange suggested that some of it could be used for road material. Only a small amount of it is suitable for road material.
They get compensation if a lot of damage is done. After all, the drainage is compensation in itself. It is making good land out of bad land.
Yes, but if I have a farm one side of the river and the Parliamentary Secretary has a farm on the other side with three times as much land as I have the small compensation given will not mean much to me if all the spoil is dumped on my side because it is convenient to those cleaning the river while the Parliamentary Secretary gets none at all.
I know that is in it all right but the Board of Works try to divide it evenly in Galway.
The Board of Works are doing a reasonably good job in the Boyne in trying to spread it. I am not complaining about it but I think there will have to be some way by which it is spread more evenly. Somebody said to me some time ago that this was the age of the conveyor belt. That method might be employed to deal with this sort of stuff. Old holes and disused quarries could be filled in and made useful. I am glad the Parliamentary Secretary has returned because I want to remind him of a promise he made to me last year about a bird sanctuary at the mouth of the Boyne. I suggested then as the wet lands were being removed that an effort would have to be made to provide a bird sanctuary where there is still that type of land. The Parliamentary Secretary said he considered it a good idea and he would consult somebody about it. The Minister for Lands on another Estimate said he was interested also.
I know the Wild Life Society are trying to do something about this but so far no effort has been made by the State to put this into being. Something should be done about it because if not a lot of the wild life in the area will simply disappear. They just do not stay if there are no wet lands for them or no sanctuary to which they can go. It would not cost anything to have it done and it should be done.
I am disappointed that an effort has not been made to spend more money on the upkeep of rivers. The Parliamentary Secretary recently replied to a letter of mine saying that it was proposed to start maintenance in June. In view of the fact that it was formerly started in March and April it is not good enough to expect people to wait until June. The reason given in the letter was that if the weeds are cut too early they have to be cut a second time. I believe the reason is purely financial.
Cut them in June and you cut them too soon.
So they say. When increases in wages have been given the Department, like other Departments and like the Department of Local Government, in particular, have a tendency to do what the Kilkenny cats are alleged to have done—feed themselves with their own tails. Wages are increased and you reduce the period for which they are employed. The workers provide the money for their own increase in wages. This is not very fair and the fact that it is the fellows at the bottom of the ladder who get dealt with that way makes it even more reprehensible. It is wrong and should not be done.
I asked a question here recently about maintenance and I wrote to the Parliamentary Secretary because it was alleged to me by an engineer that the maintenance being carried out in, for instance, the Broadmeadow, was not up to standard and that value was not being got for the amount of money spent on it, that the amount of money allocated for maintenance was not sufficient to do the job and that banks were being formed in the river and that in a short time it would be as bad as ever. The reply was that this is not so and I asked that it should be investigated because I thought the engineer who made the complaint to me knew what he was talking about. The Parliamentary Secretary said he would reply to me and I am assuming that I will hear what his engineering staff think of this complaint.
I also received a complaint from people near Oldcastle that when the Inny drainage was being done a hill was left in the middle of a tributary and when there is a lot of water it flows back up from the Inny and cannot get out with the result that their land is flooded and remains flooded. In fact, an artificial lake is formed. Five, six or seven local small farmers are very seriously affected. I have written to the Parliamentary Secretary about this and I am sure that with his usual courtesy he will have the matter dealt with.
I should like to refer to the matter of what has been done with regard to water supplies as a result of arterial drainage. Again the Parliamentary Secretary has been helpful when the matter has been brought to his notice. I am not castigating him, but I am getting an increasing number of complaints from people, whether they are right or wrong, who have put in private water supplies or who were dependent on a public water supply and, as a result of arterial drainage, find themselves without water. Those who never had it and over the years had to carry it may not find it as bad as those who had a supply. Any extra expenditure required for sinking wells to get supplies again should be borne by the Department. On one occasion the Parliamentary Secretary made a comment on this with which I disagreed violently. He suggested to me that because the water was taken away it was surface water and was not an actual spring. That is all cod. I am not saying he thought it up himself, this is probably what he was told by the experts, but the position is that there are springs in existence and it might be possible to go back in on the springs if wells are sunk, but this costs a considerable amount and additional pumping may be required. As soon as the local engineer finds this happening he should contact the people concerned and build up a fund of goodwill. If a group of people start complaining it is amazing how awkward and discontented they can become. If the matter is explained to them and an effort made to put things right most people, particularly country people, are very reasonable and prepared to co-operate fully. If they are just told: "It is no business of ours" the tendency is to become a bit sore.
Apart from Tara there are quite a number of national monuments which it is proposed to preserve. I wonder whether some effort should be made to encourage local bodies to preserve them because the system being adopted now means that there are certain monuments listed as national monuments and many others which are not. It is possible that the ones that are not listed are far more valuable than the ones that are listed. If a monument is not listed people tend to think it is of no account and, therefore, if a farmer wants to plough or drain a field he will have no hesitation in taking the monument away because he thinks the Board of Works said it does not matter. They may not have said that but that is how it reads to him. Therefore, he will tear up something which is of vital importance. Encouragement should be given to local bodies to preserve, as many of them do, small monuments throughout the country. There are many holy wells which people go to a lot of trouble to preserve. They should be encouraged to do that. Even if they are not all of great value some of them may be and could otherwise be neglected.
I wonder could the Parliamentary Secretary get a movement going which would result in items being picked up, particularly by children, which could be of importance, being taken into the local school or some centre where they could be classified. A mass of material could be unearthed. In old houses I have come across items which have been regarded as rubbish. When one suggests to people that these are historically important they are very surprised and will tell you about a lot more of this stuff they had had which was thrown out because it was in the way. If people could be encouraged to pick up coins and other items in the fields or around farmhouses it would add a lot to the evidence we have of the early days of this country.
I am grateful to the Parliamentary Secretary for his courtesy over this period. Whenever I ask him to do something he may not do exactly what I want but he makes an effort and I appreciate that. I apply that also to his officials who have been most courteous and efficient and that includes the people I complained about last year and the year before.
I should like to begin on the happy note on which Deputy Tully has concluded and express my thanks, my compliments and my congratulations to the Parliamentary Secretary and his staff for the efficient manner in which the many activities of the Board of Works are being carried out. It is customary for me to avail of this opportunity to express my particular interest in the Phoenix Park, and let me say that since Deputy Lemass assumed responsibility for it he has indicated more so as far as I am concerned than any of his predecessors the importance of the Phoenix Park not alone to Dublin but to Ireland.
On former occasions I have been critical of one or two aspects of recent development in the park not in relation to the Board of Works but to people who would seem to misinterpret the purpose for which the Phoenix Park is there. The Phoenix Park is unique not only in Ireland but in Europe as an open beautiful place where anybody is free to go to enjoy the amenities without charge but with the unwritten requirement, of which one is not reminded when entering but which is expected of him, as far as possible, having enjoyed the park, to leave it without having in any way damaged it.
I know a survey has been carried out and that the Parliamentary Secretary is awaiting its result, but I am so concerned with what is happening that I cannot await the result. I am convinced that I have anticipated correctly the result of the survey from the point of view of the despoiling of the park, the result of commercial activities of owners of horses. It is extraordinary what is happening to the 15 Acres, hitherto used by large numbers of Dublin boys and young men and as camogie pitches by young ladies. So concerned have those people been that the thousands of them who had been using these pitches have done relatively little damage.
Another point that strikes me, and it is something environmental psychologists might think about, is the remarkably small amount of vandalism in the Phoenix Park, considering its size of 1,716 acres. On the other hand, we have a situation at the moment where we tolerate commercial vandalism there. I refer to the hundreds of horses owned by people who are in fairly big business, who hire out horses to people who are allowed to despoil the park to the detriment of other users, of people who would enjoy the visual beauty of the area. At the far end of the park horse tracks extend in some areas for as far as a quarter mile. The Parliamentary Secretary has indicated this is a matter about which he is concerned and my purpose here now is to make known my feelings on it. I cannot understand why this practice has not been stopped. There is the added factor that these operations at the moment constitute a serious danger to other users of the park.
I have enjoyed horse riding in the park like anybody else but at the moment the system allows for any inexperienced person who has 75p or £1 to go to one of those stables without having to produce a guarantee he has ever sat on a horse before. He is given a horse. Many of these horses are relatively tame. He is allowed to go into the park where ladies walk their children and elderly people walk the paths. If the horse bolts and the rider is thrown, if any injury is caused to other users of the park, I understand there is no provision for compensating such a person.
I should like to say at this point that I do not think there is any better natural furniture for the park than horses and I should like to continue to see people riding horses there, but I want to see it curtailed and organised in a fashion which will cause the minimum damage to the park and guarantee that in cases of accidents other users of the park will not suffer. These are relatively simple requests, relatively simple concern for the many users of the park. I would hope that the number of horses would be reduced and that the people who are using the Phoenix Park to profit themselves would be required to pay to the Office of Public Works certain sums which would assist in some way the improvement of the area of the park which the use of these horses is despoiling.
I will move on now to one or two other matters. Apart from horses in the park, I would hope that the Parliamentary Secretary—I am sure he has given some thought to it—would take a look at the present position in regard to the tremendous increase in vehicular traffic in the Phoenix Park, especially on the main road. I am annoyed at times when I note the regulations in regard to commercial vehicles. Quite frequently I see vans and lorries going through the park. I understand they are precluded from using the park in that way and the time has come when very stringent traffic regulations such as speed limits should be introduced there. I should like to see an increase in the number of constables, or rangers, who look after the park so capably. The time has come when the necessity arises to supply these gentlemen with motorcycles in substitution for the pedal cycles they now use. This would enable them to get around the park more quickly.
I note that a building is being erected in Clonskea for the Institute of Public Administration and for the training section of the Department of Finance. On a previous occasion I spoke of the imbalance in Dublin city in the matter of buildings and institutions on the south side of the Liffey as against the north side. I understand that in most Departments there are professional planners. It seems to me that they are failing to consider the social aspects of planning in so far as they are providing for the erection of all educational, medical and Government buildings on the south side. Is there a suggestion here that on the south side of the city only live the people who are interested in these matters? Is there a suggestion here that the north side of the city is suitable for workers and factories?
This is a matter which must be looked at fairly quickly to ensure that we do not divide Dublin into a city of left and right, north and south, with on one side the educated and the cultural type, and on the other the working type. To my knowledge the Parliamentary Secretary is the first man to have done something about this. I commend him for having brought offices to the shopping centre in Phibsboro. I hope he will give further consideration to this matter and if possible bring Government offices to places like Cabra and Finglas and later on to places like Blanchardstown. This would indicate that he recognises that Dublin is a city representative in all parts of all the people.
People may think about the economy and the efficiency of putting them all in one place but to me other matters are as important as economy and efficiency. I look forward to hearing from the Parliamentary Secretary, perhaps when he is replying, that he is in sympathy with the views I have expressed, and that we can look forward to a time when we can say that the north side has more Government offices than it has at the moment. Dublin Corporation are to build their civic offices on the south side of the Liffey. That also disturbs me.
I should like to compliment the Office of Public Works on the work they are doing in Glendalough and also on the work down in Kerry which I saw last year and for which they are responsible. I do not want to injure in any way the good lady or gentleman who enjoys whatever profit accrues to her or to him for providing a service which is being provided at Glendalough. Some few weeks ago I visited Glendalough and I enjoyed it very much. I enjoyed the facilities which are provided there by the Office of Public Works but I was a bit annoyed to see in the corner of a 9th or 10th century church a little stall or shop. I know the people who have this shop are providing for a genuine need. My wife and children and I were happy to make purchases in this little shop but it would be better if it were located somewhere in the vicinity of the churches rather than in the small church in which it is located at the moment.
The final point to which I want to refer relates to this House. It is relatively unimportant but at times it has been slightly embarrassing to me walking along the corridor to hear Members of the House attributing to the portraits on the walls names which were not correct. One or two of the portraits are named. Apparently in the case of others it was assumed that everybody would know who they were. It would be of assistance to everyone and it would facilitate Deputies and Senators taking visitors through the House if all the portraits were named.
I will be brief. I usually am. I should like to thank the Parliamentary Secretary and his staff for the prompt replies I get to all my queries. Whether the jobs are done properly is another thing, but at least I get prompt replies and for that I am extremely grateful. One has to write two or three times to other Departments before one gets and reply.
I agree with Deputy L'Estrange that it would be a waste of money to spend £5,000 putting glass around the public gallery. If anyone wants to throw something down it is very easy to break glass unless we put in very expensive glass. I think that putting glass there is a waste of money. It could be dangerous. The people in the gallery will not be able to hear. Even under the existing arrangement when I am up in the gallery with deputations I find it extremely difficult to hear what is being said in the House. Perhaps this is the fault of our own diction or the acoustics but, if glass is put up there, people will not be able to hear anything.
We should have more lifts. Two lifts are not enough. There could be two more on the other side. I suggested unofficially to the Parliamentary Secretary that he might provide a shower for the female Members of the House and the female members of the staff. I understand that the male Members have these facilities. When I came in here as a very young Deputy I was informed that Leinster House was no place for a lady. Perhaps the Office of Public Works are still adopting that type of attitude. A shower could be installed in the ladies' cloakroom under the main staircase where there is as much space as one would find in a modern house. Some people might be inclined to regard the provision of shower facilities as a luxury but this is not so because very often at night we have to go direct from here to various functions and at least we would like to have available to us proper washing facilities. The cost involved would be minimal.
I do not regard the heating system in the new wing as being good. At times it is much too hot while at other times it is not nearly hot enough. I spoke to a person who was involved in the installation of the system and he pointed out that the system is based on one that was designed for Canada where there are so many weeks in the year when the weather is very cold. I do not know whether this is true but at any rate we can never anticipate what kind of weather we might get here. For instance, up to December last we had very mild weather but now in the middle of May there is ground frost at night. Therefore, the heating system should be more flexible. I understand that we are not supposed to open windows in the new block but if we do so occasionally I understand that we freeze the rooms used by the Labour Party while if they open a window they almost suffocate us.
Regarding the portraits in the hallway, I agree with Deputy Tunney's suggestion that the names of the subjects should appear with the respective portraits. Only last week I overheard an usher tell a group of school children that a certain portrait was that of Kevin O'Higgins when it was the portrait of Arthur Griffith at which they were looking. Perhaps neither name would convey a lot to very young school children. Those of us who can recognise on sight portraits of Arthur Griffith or of Kevin O'Higgins or of my father are becoming fewer and even the younger generation of ushers coming in here will not be able to do this. It would be very helpful, therefore, to have the names of the subjects with each portrait.
I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary what is the position regarding the Dunkellin drainage scheme. I do not like having to bring this matter up year after year but in my constituency it is a very thorny subject. There are many landowners who are suffering severely because of flooding in this area. Indeed, my own land is subject to flooding and, of course, the rates in County Galway are astronomical being more than £7 in the £. Now that we are entering the EEC, when every foot of land will become more valuable, more money should be made available for drainage schemes. Instead of this being the case I note that there is a cutback in the amount of money being provided for this purpose. There is a problem regarding the Dunkellin area but perhaps this could be overcome.
In so far as the local farmers are concerned they are entitled to have the land drained but, on the other hand, much revenue comes to the area by the influx of people who come to shoot there. Perhaps some scheme could be devised between the Office of the Board of Works and the Department of Lands whereby some of the wildlife could be preserved and the drainage carried out at the same time. The Dunkellin area was surveyed about seven years ago but nothing has been done since. Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary will tell us when it is expected that the work can begin on the scheme. I notice that money is still being made available for the Corrib-Headford scheme. They must have very good Deputies down there. While we are green with envy we are glad that the work is being done. Last year there was a deputation to the Minister of people from the Scarriff-Ennis area regarding flooding there. I understand from them that the last time drainage was carried out in that part of County Clare was in 1932. One would think that at least some money should be spent on drainage there now.
I agree with other speakers that some way should be devised when any river is drained to get rid of the spoil. It cannot be spread on the land because it is too sandy and if it is left in heaps it is very unsightly and results in the growth of crops of weeds. Also, it is a hazard to cattle as I have found personally because we had some of it on our own land. Small farmers in particular object to this spoil being left on their land. There should be some arrangements between the Office of Public Works and the county councils to have spoil removed. Surely it could be dumped in quarries or in some such places. I note that the Parliamentary Secretary presented prizes recently to junior schools in respect of projects they had carried out. I was on the panel of judges for that competition and I was impressed at the Boyne drainage scheme put forward by the children. However, spoil is still left on the land. There have been some complaints regarding the non-preservation of wildlife in certain areas but perhaps this problem can be overcome.
I am sorry to note that the Board of Works have discontinued the carrying out of small schemes. County councils do not seem to reach these schemes but perhaps that cannot be helped. Regarding the Shannon, work is being carried out at Portumna and Tuamgraney. The Shannon is being used increasingly by tourists and the people of Portumna tell me that this has resulted in a great deal of revenue accruing to the town. Regarding the drainage of the Shannon I am sorry to note that it is being deferred once again. In 1965 the Rydell Report estimated that the cost of draining the Shannon would be about £17 million but, of course, it would cost double that amount to do it now. Despite what Deputy Tully says I believe that if a comprehensive scheme was prepared and sent to the EEC, we could draw on some source there to help us carry out this work. The draining of the river would result in much more land being available to farmers in the area. We are told that if a country produces a reasonable scheme assistance will be given in implementing it. Obviously, this particular scheme is one that we cannot afford to carry out ourselves.
In my constituency many Garda stations have been closed and these closures always result in public outcry. However, I understand that it is proposed to build a new station at a small place called Bookeen near Athenry at a cost of between £20,000 and £30,000 and which will house one garda. Bookeen is a small place like Kilrickle where I live, and the local people think this is a gigantic waste of money and that if this money were devoted to drainage it would be much more sensible.
The amount of money spent on schools has been increased and this is a good thing. However, there does not seem to be enough liaison between the Parliamentary Secretary's Office and the Department of Education with regard to the repair and building of schools. I notice in my own constituency that a school is extensively repaired and in about two years it is given notice that it is being closed. If £8,000 is spent on reconstructing a school, as happened in one case, surely a good hard look should be taken as to whether the school is on the list for amalgamation. There is also a great deal of time lost between the county councils and the Board of Works about repairing schools. For example, in regard to one school at Ruan, I have been in touch with the Parliamentary Secretary, and everything is done except a wall. The council say the plans are with the Board of Works and the Board of Works are inclined to say the council are holding it up. Another school in north Clare, at Tubber, has a problem in regard to water. I understand they will not get grants until the water is provided. On the one hand, I am told it is Local Government who are holding it up, and Local Government complain that the Board of Works are holding it up. It is hard to know what is the true position.
While many people would say that national monuments are a luxury on which we cannot afford to spend money, I do not agree. I am delighted to see that in my own constituency places like Portumna Castle, Clontuskert Abbey, which is a very old abbey, and Claregalway Abbey are being reconstructed by the Board of Works. My only regret is that the Board of Works have not a lot more money to spend on these places. As I drive around my constituency, I often notice that it is laden with old monuments, castles and graveyards which are full of tradition. In this modern age we shall lose much of the history that is attached to these unless some society takes an interest in them. In the graveyard in Kilrickle there is a little slab which reads: "Beneath this stone here lies Anthony Daly who was hanged, drawn and quartered (in the 18th century) for stealing a turnip." Even these things are worth preserving. It shows the sort of life the people lived in those days, that a man could meet that fate for stealing a turnip.
On this Estimate last year I referred to the flower pots around the car park at Leinster House. I have also seen them in Derrynane and they are very ugly. In a country like this where we have so much beautiful cut stone it should be possible to provide better flower pots than those made of mass concrete. These flower pots might be all right in skyscraper buildings but they are out of place in an old building like Leinster House or in Derrynane.
In regard to the moving of the Departments to Athlone and Castlebar —I see Deputy Cooney and Deputy L'Estrange on either side of me and I am sure they will not like me to say this—I want to refer to the amount of money involved. It is time the Government were honest with the people. I do not know whether this is the Estimate on which one can mention this matter, but it is my belief from talking to officials in both Departments that neither Department will ever move. I know the Minister for Lands says now and then when he is in the humour that his Department should be abolished.
It is to the Estimate for the Office of Public Works that the Deputy should be addressing her remarks.
The Minister referred to the amount of money to be spent on the sites.
It was the two whole Departments that were to go. Now it is to be done in stages.
The Parliamentary Secretary would be better off using the money on drainage or something like that because it is only a gimmick. I sympathise with the Ministers who made the decision and now find it will be impossible to carry it out.
I do not agree with Deputy Tunney about the Phoenix Park. This is a beautiful park and it is big enough to facilitate horse riding. There may be something in his suggestion that riding schools and other people and their children who are using it at all should be expected to make some contribution to the Board of Works for the upkeep of the park. Horse riding should be encouraged and it is a very good sport for youngsters. It allows them to work off steam and there would be much less vandalism if they took to galloping around the park on a horse. I am glad to note the park has got some new deer from Portumna. It is a good thing to bring in a new strain. I love the park and I bring the children up there now and again to the Zoo. We are very fortunate to have such a beautiful park in Dublin city and people should be encouraged to use it more. On the whole there is very little vandalism in the park, and I notice a lot of young trees there.
On the question of drainage I meant to say that the Board of Works, like the county councils, when they are doing improvement schemes are inclined to destroy a lot of mature timber. In County Galway they would put roads through anywhere, even down the middle of your house if they got a chance. The engineers have no respect at all for old oak or beech trees. These are things which cannot be replaced in a lifetime and those of us who do plant go for soft woods. Where the Board of Works or the county council have to remove trees they should be compelled to replant. It is costly and this is why the local landowner does not do it. I am guilty myself. The county council removed hundreds of trees from my land and I replanted some soft woods. There is nothing more beautiful than well-planted land. It serves a dual purpose: it is a shelter for animals and it beautifies the country.
I want to lend my voice to some of the things that were said and to mention some of the things that have been left unsaid. I am amazed to find in the list of castles programmed for renovation the Parliamentary Secretary omitted any mention of a castle for which we in Limerick have been fighting for some seven or eight years, namely, King John's Castle. At the meeting of Limerick City Council last Monday night the officials were asked to draw the attention of the Board of Works to the fact that holes were being bored in the wall of this ancient castle, stones were being removed and the iron railings had also been removed. The castle itself is overgrown with creepers. Years ago we had discussions with the Shannon Development Company about the restoration of this historic castle as a tourist attraction and it was estimated that the income derived from the restored castle would more than compensate for any expenditure in putting the castle into a proper state of repair. It was estimated that a handsome dividend would ensue from any work carried out. Plans have been passing back and forth ever since and nothing concrete has been done. This castle is situated in the heart of Limerick city right on the spot where the siege of 1691 took place and within a few hundred yards of the Treaty Stone.
There were difficulties years ago because there were 12 or 15 corporation houses built in the courtyard of the castle. We arranged to remove these tenants and rehouse them at a decent rent. There was an ambitious scheme of restoration designed to attract tourists. But, as I say, nothing has been done. Three or four years ago architects and engineers from the Office of Public Works came down and discussed the whole matter. Still nothing has been done. If immediate steps are not taken irreparable damage will be done. Other castles, some not as important as this one, are listed for renovation and repair, but there is no mention of King John's Castle. The money has been guaranteed by both the Shannon Development Company and the Limerick Corporation. All the legalities have been complied with, but the Office of Public Works will do nothing.
The Parliamentary Secretary referred to the development of the quays along the Shannon, particularly along the Upper Shannon. This is to be commended because this waterway provides one of the most attractive tourist amenities we have when people are growing more and more anxious for leisure away from the rush and bustle of modern living. They are leaving the roads now and going back to the houseboats. In order to provide easy access to the Shannon the canals should be developed. It should be a simple matter to clear the canals of weeds.
The Parliamentary Secretary mentioned the rehabilitation of handicapped children. This is work we have been doing in Limerick now for quite some time. The handicapped are being trained to become useful citizens.
