Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1955 > Committee of Public Accounts > Report - Appropriation Accounts 1953 - 1954

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Déardaoin, 10 Samhain, 1955.

Thursday, 10th November, 1955.

The Committee sat at 10.30 a.m.

DEPUTY CARTER in the chair.

Liam Ó Cadhla (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste), Mr. M. Breathnach and Mr. J. Mooney (An Roinn Airgeadais) called and examined.

VOTE 38—LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Mr. J. Garvin called and examined.

567. Chairman.—Paragraphs 41 to 44, inclusive, of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General refer to this Vote. Paragraph 41 reads:—

“Subhead I.1.—Contributions towards Housing Loan Charges of Local Authorities.

The contributions towards loan charges of local authorities under the Housing (Financial and Miscellaneous Provisions) Acts, 1932 to 1952, amounted to £939,720. Non-statutory contributions in recoupment of the additional charges incurred on certain loans advanced from the Local Loans Fund for subsidy housing schemes by reason of increases in the rates of interest payable on such loans amounted to £139,509.”

Have you anything to add to that, Mr. Ó Cadhla?

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—I understand it is not intended to issue these non-statutory contributions towards charges on loans sanctioned after 1st May, 1953.

Mr. Garvin.—No. They have been discontinued as from the 1st May, 1953, as regards borrowings after that date.

568. Chairman.—Why were they discontinued?—The rate of interest was 3¼ per cent. before the 1st May, 1953. After that date it was raised to 5¼ per cent. Coinciding with that, the level at which subsidy came to be paid for new houses was raised from £1,000 to £1,500 in the case of serviced houses and up to £1,000 in the case of non-serviced houses. There was a general revision of the financial system applicable to loans for housing purposes.

569. I take it that subsidy is paid in respect of all houses erected by local authorities?—A subsidy of 66⅔ is payable in respect of the re-housing of persons displaced by slum clearance and other activities of the local authority. Subsidy at the rate of 33⅓ per cent. is payable in respect of what is called normal housing, that is, housing for persons who have not been displaced from their previous dwellings by any operation of the local authorities. The subsidy in respect of labourers’ cottages is at a flat rate of 60 per cent.

570. With regard to labourers’ cottages, how is the rate of vesting proceeding in respect of the older types of cottage?— Rather slowly. The older types—particularly pre-1914 and 1919 cottages—are let at very small rents. I presume the tenants feel it would not pay them to purchase as compared with the position under which they pay these very low rents and the local authorities are responsible for the maintenance. I imagine maintenance is the whole kernel of the problem.

571. Chairman.—Paragraph 42 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Subhead I.3.—Grants under the Housing (Financial and Miscellaneous Provisions) Acts, 1932 to 1952, and under the Housing (Amendment) Acts, 1948, 1949, 1950 and 1952.

Section 7 of the Housing (Amendment) Act, 1952, empowered the Minister for Local Government, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, to make a grant, not exceeding £50, to any person providing and installing in a dwelling-house a private water supply and sewerage facilities. The scheme was limited to houses situated in areas where no public piped water supply or sewerage scheme was provided. Grants paid in the year under review amounting to £5,024 are included in the charge to this subhead.”

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—This is a new service. Expenditure was incurred for the first time in the year under review.

572. Deputy Bartley.—I take it that, in the main, this facility is available only to houses in rural areas?

Deputy J. Brennan.—Houses where there is no piped water supply.

Deputy Bartley.—Technically, I understand that a rural area is a non-urbanised community and that a town of a certain size is still looked upon as a rural area— a town, say, of 1,000 or 1,500 persons. It frequently happens in these towns that the public supply provided is not readily available to a house on the immediate outskirts of such a town. As far as I can find out, this grant is not payable in such cases.

Chairman.—No public or piped water supply is available? I take it that most towns of the population you mentioned would be understood to have a local authority of some kind, either Town Commissioners or an urban council, and I take it that it would be available?—They need not necessarily have special incorporated local government. A number of towns of the size mentioned by Deputy Bartley have no local government of their own. They are run by the county council. The county council is the sanitary authority. In the case of any town with a 1,000 population, I imagine they would be very exceptional circumstances in which they would not have a public water supply. In that case, it would be installed by the county council, as the sanitary authority.

573. Deputy Bartley.—With all respect, both the Chairman and the Accounting Officer miss the point I want to make. I am talking about towns which have public supplies but, because of the location of a particular house, because of the distance of a house on the outskirts of that town from the main, they cannot get a connection from the local authority without paying a substantial sum down. When they apply to put in this water themselves, they are told they cannot get this £50 grant because they are in the vicinity of a supply of water made available by the local authority.—I understand the point the Deputy is making. It would be difficult to make any comment on it in a general way. No doubt, the local authority will have a look at the merits of each particular case. As I understand it, if an application falls to be dealt with under Subhead I.3, it has to be shown that not only is there not a water supply available in the immediate vicinity of the house but that there is no public water supply reasonably near from which a supply can be taken or from which a supply is likely to be provided by the local authority for that particular area within a reasonable time.

574. Chairman.— The Department of Agriculture have a scheme for the provision of a supply of water to farmers’ houses. Their scheme seems more attractive, does it not?—It is intended to induce people to provide a water supply for the dairies and out-offices of the farms.

575. Deputy Bartley.—Are these two schemes not complementary—the Agriculture and the Local Government schemes? As I understand it, the Agriculture scheme enables a farmer to bring a supply of water from a well or other source to a position outside his house and, when he has done that, he can come along to Local Government to get this £50 to bring the water into his house.

Deputy Sheldon.—No.

Deputy Bartley.—That is as it has been explained to me.

576. Mr. Garvin.—We leave the administration of these £50 grants mainly to the local authority. The £50 grant would have to be measured in relation to the cost of bringing the water supply into the house and of providing a cistern which would hold the water and also providing for taking the water away in the form of a piped run-off. Even if the Department of Agriculture had given a grant for bringing water into the vicinity of the out-house, it would cost about £100 to do the domestic installation before they would qualify for the full grant. These estimates are critically examined.

577. Chairman.—Paragraph 43 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Subhead Q.—Grants to Local Authorities for Improvement of certain roads in the Gaeltacht and Congested Areas.

With a view to promoting the economic and social development of the Gaeltacht and congested areas, provision was made under this subhead for grants to local authorities for the improvement of certain roads conducive to the development of the tourist industry in these areas, including roads giving access to tourist resorts within the areas. It is proposed that the programme of road improvements should extend over a period of eight years, the expenditure in any year being limited to £400,000. Grants totalling £360,000 in respect of approved work were made to eleven local authorities in the year.”

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—I have nothing to add, That paragraph is for information.

578. Who was the approving authority in this case?—The Minister for Local Government.

579. Does the Department approve of an individual grant or is it a bulk approval?—The Department’s inspectors are aware of all the particular schemes put forward for execution with the aid of these grants. I think that in most cases more schemes would be put forward than the grant would cover so that certain schemes are selected with the approval of the Minister and the grant is allocated for them.

580. Deputy Bartley.—Would the Accounting Officer be able to say whether the provision of this money has affected in any way the ordinary grants made to local authorities for this work or work of the same kind? Have the counties benefiting from this money received less in the way of ordinary grants because of the provision of this money?—No. These grants are over and above the normal road fund grant.

581. Chairman.—Paragraph 44 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Motor Tax Account.

A test examination has been applied to the Motor Tax Account with satisfactory results. The certificates and reports of the Local Government auditors who examine the motor tax transactions of local authorities were scrutinised, in so far as they were available, but in seven cases this audit has not been completed at the date of my test examination.”

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—I have ascertained that the audit has now been completed in the seven cases referred to.

The paragraph continues:—

“The gross proceeds of motor vehicle, etc., duties in 1953-54 amounted to £4,422,571 compared with £3,869,439 in the previous year. They include £35,665 attributable to fines collected by the Department of Justice, £5,947 in respect of fees received under the Road Traffic Act (Parts VI and VII) (Fees) Regulations, 1937 (S.R. & O., No. 92 of 1937), and £59,231 received from government departments in accordance with a decision by the Department of Finance that sums corresponding to motor tax should be paid into the Motor Tax Account in respect of State-owned vehicles from the year 1953 onwards. A statement of the gross and net receipts of the Motor Tax Account, and of the payments thereout to the Exchequer, appears on pages 6 and 7 of the Finance Accounts, 1953-54.”

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—Contributions in lieu of motor tax appear for the first time in this account.

582. Deputy Sheldon.—I notice that Mr. Ó Cadhla says this is a decision by the Department of Finance. I would have thought this would be a decision by the Government rather than by the Department of Finance.

Mr. J. Mooney. — I think it was a decision of the Government. There was a White Paper issued on it and there was Government approval. The note we have on it is contained in a circular issued on the 20th October, 1953. There was a White Paper issued in connection with the matter.

Deputy Bartley.—The one significant fact about it is that there was an increase of £600,000 in receipts in one year.

Deputy J. Brennan.—I do not think there was a corresponding increase in the amount collected in fines.

583. Chairman.—Is the amount paid by the State departments computed in the same way as the ordinary motor tax?

Mr. J. Mooney.—Yes. That is the idea, except that the amounts are paid like a bounty in lieu of rates, as sort of exgratia payments.

584. Chairman.—What are the fees, amounting to £5,947, under the Road Traffic Act (Parts VI and VII) (Fees) Regulations, 1937?

Deputy J. Brennan.—They are for small public service vehicle plates.

Deputy Bartley.—They are fees of the Garda officials who carry out periodic inspections.

Deputy J. Brennan.—I thought they only applied in connection with the issue of plates.

Deputy Sheldon.—These fees for examination are dealt with in the Garda Síochána Vote.

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—They are mostly in connection with public service vehicles.

585. Deputy Sheldon.—Deputy Brennan referred to the fines not showing the same increase. The fines actually went down by £4,000 compared with the year before.

Deputy J. Brennan.—The number of road accidents was up.

Deputy Bartley.—The justices are getting more lenient.

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—The fees in question are in connection with the issue of certificates of competence, certificates of fitness, licences in respect of large public service vehicles—there are three or four different categories under this head—issue of vehicle plates, the issue of new vehicle plates in place of lost vehicle plates, issue of drivers’ badges and conductors’ badges.

586. Deputy J. Brennan.—With regard to subhead A—Salaries, Wages and Allowances—and the note on same which says that the saving is attributable to vacancies—was it not found necessary to replace this personnel? Is it part of a scheme for reducing the numbers employed in the various departments?

Mr. Garvin. — The savings represent mainly casual vacancies. Inevitably there would be some delay in filling vacancies caused by deaths, resignations and retirements. The variation of £7,000 is regarded as reasonable in relation to the gross expenditure.

587. Chairman.—With regard to subhead H — Grants to Local Authorities, etc., under Housing (Ireland) Act, 1919— this is a very small amount?—Yes.

What type of grants are involved?— The remnants of the liability arising out of the State subsidy that was made available at that time to housing authorities. They represent loans that are coming near the end of their term.

588. On subhead I.1 — Contributions towards Housing Loan Charges of Local Authorities—would you be in a position to say what is the reason for the delay by the Dublin Corporation in applying the proceeds of stock issues?—The loan subsidy is calculated on the actual disbursements by the local authority in respect of loan charges. In the case of Dublin Corporation, delay arises in discharging the subsidy in full until the Corporation has determined the specific schemes to which the proceeds of a particular stock issue will be applied. As the terms of stock issue may vary, the loan charges will vary accordingly and the final calculation of the subsidy cannot, therefore, be made in advance.

589. On subhead I.2—Grants under the Housing (Financial and Miscellaneous Provisions) Acts, 1932 to 1948—do you think you have much more money to pay out under this subhead?—I think we can regard it as practically wound up. However, we like to keep a nominal amount in case any application would arise.

590. With regard to subhead I.3— Grants under the Housing (Financial and Miscellaneous Provisions) Acts, 1932 to 1952, and under the Housing (Amendment) Acts, 1948, 1949, 1950 and 1952—I see by the explanatory note that you make deductions in respect of defective workmanship. Do you do this in many cases? — Yes. The grants are reduced wherever the inspector reports that the workmanship was not up to the standard contemplated in the regulations. In some cases I suppose the applicant ought to be thankful to get a reduced grant because occasionally complaints are made that a certain amount of new walling may not be new walling at all and that really they should be content with a reconstruction grant. We try to decide these cases on their merits as they arise.

591. Following the introduction of the 1950 Housing (Amendment) Act and when the supplementary grants came into being, at that stage or subsequently there was some confusion amongst engineers regarding estimates. I know of cases where a number of extra visits had to be paid by engineers to applicants for the purpose of determining their eligibility or otherwise for a supplementary grant?— There may have been duplication. The local authorities are responsible for the payment of the supplementary grants. I suppose they might want to have a look at the building themselves. Under the 1950 Act they were entitled to make a scheme of their own. As far as I know, generally the notification by the Department of Local Government to the local authority that the Department has paid a grant is regarded as bona fide evidence of the house being qualified structurally. Then they have a look at the application from the point of view of the means of the applicant and his status under the particular qualifying requirements of the Act.

592. Deputy J. Brennan.—There is a reduction where corrugated asbestos or corrugated iron is used for roofing, irrespective in the case of repairs as to what the other costs may be, which I think is most unfair. A man may expend £300 on reconstruction and get a grant of £78 whereas another may expend £100 and get a grant of £80.

Chairman.—That would be raised more properly in the Estimate.

593. Deputy Bartley.—Is there not a certain type of house in which the local authority does the examination? — The houses that come under subhead 1.7, additional rooms or chalets for tuberculosis patients are examined by the local authority and paid for, and the Department recoups.

I was not referring to that but to a “Section 12 house”?—That is under the 1954 Housing Act. In the case of houses in which the sanitary authority has served notice on the landlord and in cases under the 1954 Act where application is made for a grant for repairs, all inspections are carried out by the local housing authority.

594. Chairman. — On subhead I.5 — Competitions for Designs for Housing Schemes — do you intend arranging for further competitions?—No. We feel that the experience of local authorities has progressed far enough now to enable them to dispense with the idea of a competition. There is an increasing tendency in recent years, since this competition was originally proposed, to employ architects; so now they have the type of advice which the competition contemplated they would have under standard plans.

595. Deputy Bartley. — Are standard plans still available to the public for purchase at a small price as was formerly the case?—Certain revisions in the older types of standard plan are in course of being made and it may be that the older types are going out of print but it is intended that they be replaced if they are not already available in the new form.

596. Chairman. — On subhead J. — Acquisition of Land (Allotments) (Amendment) Act, 1934—these are grants towards the loss of rent. What proportion of the loss would the contributions cover?—I I have not a detailed note on this but I think it was intended that any loss would be recouped from the Department’s Vote. The seeds, manures and implements are made available free to the unemployed plot-holders by the Department of Agriculture.

597. With regard to subhead K—Grants to Local Authorities for the Execution of Works under the Local Authorities (Works) Act, 1949—I notice the exact amount provided has been paid out. Do you bear the full cost of these works?—Yes.

598. On subhead O — Payments under Section 5 (3) of the Local Government Act, 1933—there must be very few officers provided for under this subhead. What type of officer is covered?—I think there is only one officer at present. The section is intended to recoup to the local authority the proportion of pension which would be payable to an officer who had lost service for political reasons. For instance, if the officer had been dismissed from a job in the Six Counties and subsequently got a job with a local authority in the 26 Counties, the superannuation which that officer would have had but for the dismissal is met proportionately, so far as service is concerned, by the State. I think there is only one officer qualifying at the moment.

599. Deputy Bartley.—On subhead P— Text-book on, and Revision and Codification of, Local Government Law—what work is in progress under this subhead?— The text book was published early this year and the revision and codification of the Local Government law is proceeding in three sections. One is in the hands of the draftsman who is specially concerned with this codification work. In other words, the Departmental portion of the work has been completed. Another is in process of completion in the Department and the same applies to the third section of the work. Portion of the work was interrupted owing to the death of the gentleman who was engaged on it.

600. Deputy J. Brennan.—On subhead R—Development Works in Bogs acquired by Local Authorities — in what circumstances do local authorities acquire bog? —In effect, this is a survival from the Emergency times and the time of shortage of coal during the Korean war. As you can see, it is a diminishing provision now. It was continued under emergency legislation.

601. Chairman.—Is the amount of bog development solely confined to drainage operations?—They were also empowered to make roads into bogs and produce turf themselves, but the activities of Bord na Móna have expanded so much that the local authorities have ceased for the greater part to be interested in turf production.

602. On subhead S.1—Appropriations in Aid—item 1 in the details is:—Fees payable by local authorities, etc., for audit of their accounts. Do you recover the full cost of audit?—No, not the full cost. We recover the amount that is considered a reasonable charge against local authorities. We have to take into account that in addition the auditor does a considerable amount of work in certifying grants for the Department, such as motor taxation grants. The work is estimated as nearly as possible and the amount recovered from them.

603. There is also the Statement of Receipts and Payments by the Department of Local Government in the year ending 31st March, 1954 for the National Development Fund. These grants are earmarked for special purposes. Do you see that they are spent for these special purposes?—Yes.

604. Deputy J. Brennan.—If the local authority officers are surcharged for any irregular payments, where is it shown in the account?—That would not affect the Government accounts. It is the local authority account that would be affected by a surcharge of that character.

It would not be shown in your accounts at all?—No, the audit of the accounts by the local government auditor is confined to the local authority accounts and a charge or a surcharge arising would be made by striking out a particular amount out of the local authority account and declaring it to be payable by the person charged or surcharged, so that would not affect the State accounts at all.

605. If the surcharge was in respect of the irregular payment out of funds which were a subvention from the Central Fund?—The Department of Local Government would insist on getting that direct from the local authority and the adjustment that would be made subsequently would be with reference to the surcharge in the local authority accounts.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 63—HEALTH.

Mr. P. Ó Cinnéide called and examined.

606. Chairman. — Under subhead B—Travelling Expenses—the note states that travelling was restricted as a measure of economy?—Yes. That was in response to an appeal in a Department of Finance circular. We gave instructions to our travelling officers to limit their travelling and inspections to the minimum. We aimed at a saving of about £1,000 but we realised somewhat more than that. It is not a form of economy that always pays because very often, in going round the country, these officers find means of improving some of the services or suggest economies. However, as a result of this appeal we made these economies in a year when we otherwise would have spent a good deal more.

607. Deputy Mrs. Crowley. — Under subhead F.3—Dissemination of Information and Advice on Health—to whom was the information referred to about health given?—This was general publicity in the form of advertisements and under various other headings. The advertisements consisted of newspaper notices. Other activities included the showing of films in schools, the display of window bills in buses and trains and the dissemination of pamphlets, leaflets and so on. The bulk of the money in previous years was spent on the production and display of films, but we have now cut down on that partly because it turned out to be very expensive and partly because it is not very easy to produce suitable health films, though the ones we did get were reasonably good. To make a film which would run for about 20 minutes would cost us between £4,000 and £5,000. We made four or five of them dealing with different aspects of health; food hygiene was the chief one, but we also made films on T.B., diphtheria and accidents in the home. These films were shown in most of the cinemas throughout the country and some of them were revived. We had some difficulty in getting them shown in some of the commercial cinemas because we do not pay and they are not very inclined to put them on unless they have nothing else to show. We find that the showing of films in schools, done for us by the National Film Institute, is the most rewarding medium of all. They send two or three units round the country with a staff of two or three with each unit and they arrange to give the film showings after consultation with the local county medical officer of health who very often appears himself and speaks to the children on the subject matter of the films. In that year there was a total of over 1,200 film shows given in schools throughout the country and we estimate they were viewed by about 75,000 school children. Sometimes the films are also run during the evenings for adults and we estimate that 16,000 adults saw the films in that year. It costs a good deal of money but we find it is a rewarding expenditure.

Deputy Bartley.—It seems to be a very reasonable expenditure from the amount of work which the Accounting Officer has told us it makes possible.

608. Chairman. — Do you charge the proprietors of the picture houses for the films they put on?—No. On the contrary, the proprietors want to charge us for showing the films but I should like to say that the National Film Institute, ourselves and the proprietors of many of the cinemas have a sort of friendly working arrangement. We help one another and we get the work done at a very low cost.

609. In connection with the circulation of information and advertisements, I suppose you avail of the Stationery Office for a good lot of that work?—Where we are advertising in the newspapers, we do, and also in connection with the leaflets.

610. On subhead H—Grants to Health Authorities—I notice in your explanation of the subhead you state that there was a saving of £30,000 due to liquidation of reserve stocks. How did that arise?—These are stocks of medicines and household goods such as blankets which were accumulated during the Korean war in anticipation of a more serious development which happily did not occur. Most local authorities accumulated one year’s supply of reserve stocks and when they found it possible to liquidate them there was a saving on current expenditure.

611. Deputy Bartley. — Generally, how were the grants to health authorities calculated—on what basis?—On the basis of the audited expenditure on health services of the local authorities.

And the percentage is?—50-50.

Deputy J. Brennan.—I think 1947-48 is taken as the basic year?—Yes, and the State and local authorities are now paying equal shares.

612. Deputy Bartley.—Does this basis apply to extensions only or does it apply to existing services also?—To existing services and to extensions of the health services. They are all reckoned as one now for the purposes of the grant.

613. Chairman.—Does it also apply to grants for hospital construction? — No. These come under another subhead.

614. Under subhead I—Contributions to Local Authorities for the Improvement of County Homes and for alternative Accommodation for certain Classes hitherto maintained therein—how many local authorities avail of these services? Perhaps I should have asked did many local authorities avail of them? — I think there were only three in that year. The working out of schemes for the reconstruction of the county homes is taking a good deal of time and in the year under review the schemes had been only partially in operation for three local authorities—Galway County Council, Kilkenny County Council, and Tipperary South Riding County Council.

615. Under subhead K—Hospitals Trust Fund (Grant-in-Aid) — and this is the subhead under which I should have raised the question of the grants for hospital construction, what general control is exercised by the Department over this expenditure? — The schemes for reconstruction and renovation or for the building of new hospitals have to be submitted to the Department and approved. The general scheme is approved first. The detailed plans have then to be drawn up by the promoting authorities’ technical advisers and submitted with an estimate of the cost to the Department. Sometimes the plans are revised after consultation between the promoters’ technical advisers and the Department and then they are finally approved. An arrangement is also made about the basis of the grant which varies in different schemes. In the case of a big hospital built by a local authority and intended to serve a regional rather than a county area or a voluntary hospital the grant would naturally be large. In the case of most regional hospitals the grant is practically 100 per cent. and it varies in smaller cases to 66⅓ per cent. or 50 per cent. for a district hospital.

616. Deputy Sheldon.—Under this subhead there is a very high surplus in the order of 20 per cent. of the estimated amount. Could the Accounting Officer give us some idea of how these savings could be apportioned for the reasons that emerge from his note? What I am wondering at is if he is satisfied that none of this delay which accounted for a saving of £1,500,000 was foreseeable. After all, £1,500,000 over-voted by the Dáil is a considerable sum, and I think most of the Departments should by this time be experienced enough to be able to foresee delays that would account for such a sum?

Deputy Bartley. — If Deputy Sheldon waits until the buildings are completed he will find the shoe will be on the other foot.

Deputy Sheldon.—But my point is why vote the money in a particular year; why ask the taxpayers in one year to put up £1,500,000 which is not expended in that year?

Chairman.—I think we must leave this to the Accounting Officer? — This particular provision which is a Grant-in-Aid is regarded as capital expenditure. It is not taken into account directly in determining taxation or revenue for Budget purposes. This was the first year during which any portion of the expenditure fell on the Exchequer; previously it was met entirely from the Hospitals Trust Fund. I am afraid I cannot give you a very detailed answer because I think it would be almost impossible to determine exactly how much was unspent under the different schemes but I can say, in so far as building grants are concerned, there was a saving of £1,364,000. I would point out that there is a very big number of schemes in the building programme. I think the number would be around 500. Over the progress of a very large number of these the Department has no control; several are being run by local authorities and some of the very big ones are run by voluntary agencies like the voluntary hospitals. We are not in a position to force these people to proceed at a certain pace. We have to pay the grants as they proceed with the work. It is a matter of very considerable difficulty to get any advance idea of the rate of progress and we can only go on experience of previous years which is not always very satisfactory.

617. Deputy Bartley. — There is one very important aspect which is this: it seems to me that some of these works are being carried out on a time and material basis, and I assume they did not originate on that basis — that they were the subject of something in the nature of a firm tender. Is it the experience of the Department that in a very large contract they find themselves after the work has proceeded in the position where they have to convert the contract into one on a basis of time and material?—It is not the ordinary practice to convert from one basis of payment to another. I cannot recall any such case. It may have happened on occasion that because circumstances changed it may have been thought necessary to change over in order to speed up the work. Sometimes for example, we have found in relation to additions or extras approved in the course of work that it was desirable to have these done on a schedule of rates or a time and material basis. Broadly speaking, though, we aim at lump sum contracts. We prefer that.

618. Deputy Sheldon.—Just in relation to what Mr. Ó Cinnéide said, I can appreciate that extras might have to be dealt with on a different basis but I did not quite follow how it could arise that delay would be met by changing the basis of the contract. I would have thought that strict enforcement of the contract would be a better way of producing results rather than changing over to a time and materials basis?—It has happened that occasionally we have been advised — particularly where an element of urgency came into the contract—that it would be desirable to change over to get work consisting of extras or additions completed more quickly, but that is an exceptional procedure.

619. Might I put it this way as I understand it now? A change takes place not because the contractor is delaying but because some circumstances arise of greater urgency?—I think it would be very unusual—in fact I cannot recall any case in which the basis of payment in a big contract was changed over. It would relate mainly to extras and additions on the original contract.

620. Chairman. — What is the present position as regards completion of the hospital building programme?—I should say roughly speaking that we are about half way through from the point of view of expenditure. The total estimated cost of the programme at present—the estimate has had to be changed from time to time—is about £39,000,000. We have spent approximately half that to date.

621. Deputy J. Brennan.—On subhead K—Hospitals Trust Fund—I take it that in view of the improved position of the Hospitals Trust Fund we may anticipate a smaller estimate in future under this head?—I hope so, Deputy, but of course we cannot be sure that income from Sweepstakes will be maintained. It has been improving, fortunately.

622. Deputy Sheldon. — This year’s estimate is down £2,250,000?—It is, yes. I think you will see that part of the saving in expenditure was due to Sweepstake income being somewhat higher than anticipated.

623. Deputy J. Brennan.—Also, in view of the fact that our hospitalisation programme is about half way through?—Of course, there are still some big items to come along.

624. Deputy Bartley. — Subhead M— Grants in respect of Training of native Irish Speakers in Hospital Nursing—has the Department experienced any difficulty in getting the co-operation of local health authorities in carrying out this scheme?—It does not depend to a very large extent on the co-operation of local authorities. It is the question of recruiting that caused difficulty recently.

625. I understand that, but do you not require to find places in the local authority hospitals in which to train these applicants? — We have arrangements with one training hospital in Galway, another in Cork and another in Dublin. We are confined to training hospitals of course; we cannot send them to hospitals which the Nursing Board does not recognise as training hospitals. If we did, they would be only wasting their time.

626. The question to which I want an answer is—have you had any difficulty in finding a sufficient number of vacancies for probationers in the hospitals which are qualified to operate this scheme?— No.

627. Chairman.—On item No. 5 of the Appropriations-in-Aid, can you give us some more information regarding this item?—Salary of officers on loan?

Yes?—Our chief medical adviser was on loan to the Medical Research Council during the past year. There was a higher executive officer on loan to the Mass Radiography Association, one shorthand typist was on loan to the World Health Organisation and our Dietician was on loan to the Medical Research Council. A proportion of the technical staff and some administrative staff are engaged on work in connection with the construction of regional sanatoria and their salaries are recovered from the Hospitals Trust Fund.

VOTE 64—OIFIG AN ARD-CHLARAITHEORA.

Mr. P. Ó Cinneide further examined.

628. Chairman.—I notice on subhead E—Appropriations-in-Aid—that the fees received were greater than expected owing to the increased scale — has the introduction of the short certificate increased the demand? — Not very much. Even before the short birth certificate was brought into existence there were arrangements for the supplying of cheap birth certificates in connection with social welfare legislation and that is our main source of revenue for that type of certificate. In the National Insurance, in the Unemployment Insurance, and the Widows’ and Orphans’ Pensions Acts and some others there are provisions for the issue of cheap birth certificates, and it is mainly under those that we are asked for cheap birth certificates.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 27—AGRICULTURE.

Mr. J. Dempsey called and examined.

629. Chairman.—Paragraph 25 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows:—

“Subhead M.8—Farm Buildings Scheme and Water Supplies.

The expenditure charged to this subhead includes £400,850 in respect of grants issued under the farm buildings scheme, £108,856 under the water supplies scheme and £64,167 for administrative expenses. The farm buildings scheme provided for the payment to rated occupiers of agricultural land of grants towards the cost of construction of new farm buildings, the extension and repair of existing buildings, the laying and repair of roadways, paths and farmyards, and the construction of tanks, silos and cattle enclosures. Grants paid in the year under review included £282,034 in respect of newly constructed buildings at rates varying according to the nature of the work undertaken; £28,433 for improvement of existing buildings on the basis of 50 per cent. of the approved estimated cost of labour, subject to a maximum grant for each building equal to three-fifths of the grant for a new building of the same class; and £90,383 for other approved works on the basis of 50 per cent. of the estimated labour cost. The scheme for the installation of water supplies in farm dwellings provides for the payment of grants equal to 50 per cent. of the approved estimated cost of installation, subject to a maximum grant of £100. No grant is payable for any work estimated to cost less than £10.”

With regard to paragraph 25, have you anything to add Mr. Ó Cadhla?

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—No, I have nothing to add to paragraph 25. It is just informative.

630. On paragraph 25, I see you spent £108,000 on the water supply scheme. The scheme appears to be more popular than the Department of Local Government scheme. Of course, this scheme applies to all houses, I take it, and the Local Government scheme is restricted to new houses?

Mr. Dempsey.—To new dwellings— yes.

This applies to all farm dwellings?— Yes, to those not eligible under the Local Government scheme.

631. Is it proposed to amend this water supply scheme? — Yes, the Minister has under consideration some extensions in the areas concerned with the T.B. scheme.

Some extensions possibly to water supplies for farmyards? — He has that under consideration.

632. Deputy J. Brennan.—Under the scheme at present, it is essential in order to qualify for a grant to bring the water into the dwelling house?—That is so, yes.

That then would not agree with the suggestion that the two grants are complementary.

Deputy Bartley.—I stand corrected. I was looking for information and I got it.

633. Chairman. — When you say there are to be some extensions, these extensions will only be applied to the scheduled areas for T.B.?—Possibly, at the beginning.

634. Chairman.—Paragraphs 26 and 27 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General read:—

“Subhead M.9—Land Rehabilitation Project.

The expenditure on this service is made up as follows:—

The Land Reclamation Act, 1949, authorises the Minister for Agriculture to carry out land reclamation, field drainage and other works and provides for the payment by the occupiers of a contribution towards the cost, the contribution being payable either in full or, if the occupier so elects, by means of an annuity, when the Minister certifies that the work has been completed. Under the arrangements made for the operation of the project an occupier might have approved work carried out by the Department on agreeing to pay two-fifths of the estimated cost plus the cost of fertilisers and lime supplied, subject to a maximum of £12 per statute acre. It was decided in May, 1953, not to undertake work which was estimated to involve a charge on public funds in excess of £30 per acre. The scheme also provided that an occupier might undertake the work himself and, where this was done to the satisfaction of the Department, he was entitled to a grant amounting to two-thirds of the estimated cost subject to a maximum of £20 per acre. This maximum was increased to £30 per acre in November, 1952.”

Has the Comptroller and Auditor General anything to add?

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—This and the following paragraphs are just for information. Paragraph 27 records a change in the scheme in so far as State liability for the reclamation of land was limited to £30 per acre as from May, 1953. I understand the position has since been altered.

Mr. Dempsey. — Yes, Mr. Chairman. Increased costs may be incurred under certain conditions.

635. Deputy Bartley. — What is the maximum now? — The maximum is related to the cost. Once it passes the maximum in operation already, if the farmer contributes half the extra costs, then under the amended scheme provision is made for a further 50 per cent. contribution from the State.

636. I am sorry to delay on this, but on this last piece of information does this £30 per acre apply to the Twenty-six Counties as a whole?—Yes, that is under the A Scheme where the farmer does the job himself. The maximum grant which he may get is £30 per acre. Under the second scheme, that is where the work is undertaken by the Department, the farmer was heretofore expected to contribute £12, two-fifths of the cost. That contribution may be increased if the farmer is prepared to pay half the additional expenditure required in reclaiming the land and the State to contribute the other half. Some jobs were fairly big and it was not possible to do them within the permitted limits and the farmer was not willing to undertake them. The State could not undertake them within the maximum cost permitted and so the maximum had to be raised, but the condition was introduced that the farmer contribute half the additional cost. More expensive jobs can be undertaken on this 50-50 basis.

637. Perhaps the Accounting Officer would confirm this: the maximum is £30 per acre and if it cost more than £30 to reclaim, then it will not be approved for reclamation? If it costs more than £45 per acre it will not be approved for reclamation; is that the position now?— It will be approved under Section A provided the farmer is prepared to bear the additional cost above £45.

638. Is there any maximum now beyond which land will not be approved for land reclamation by the Department’s officers?—There is a maximum in the sense that more money will not be spent by the Department on the land than the land will bear or that will be economic from the point of view of repayment. The annuity question comes in here and there has to be some assurance that the land will be worth the annuity which will be put on it.

639. That is slightly more involved than I anticipated the answer would be. Is it the position now that, instead of having a fixed figure as a maximum, the figure is the one arrived at by the inspecting officer in relation to the economic value of the land, both in its present state and in its potentially reclaimed state?—That is more or less the position. Before the Minister will approve of any particular applicant going ahead with a particular job under the B Scheme he has to satisfy the Land Commission as regards the annuity and show that it will be related to the security in the land when improved.

I am afraid that is hardly any improvement. It introduces a personal element to a large extent into the operation of the scheme.

640. Chairman.—Have you any idea what the scheme costs before you set the limit of, say, £30 per acre?—Of course, there is information as regards jobs; but then the jobs are very variable, and some of them can be very expensive. There may be heavy drainage costs when the work runs into a lot of rock and material of that kind. Such a job can be very costly. As against that, some of them are not expensive where it is merely the superficial job of removing light scrub and clearing fences; we describe that as “the not so difficult jobs.” When it comes to underground drainage and the provision of outlets and all that kind of thing, it can become very expensive.

641. Paragraph 28 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“The work carried out by the Department was done either by direct labour or through the agency of contractors employed for the purpose. It was decided in November, 1952, that all such work should be entrusted to contractors, except in certain districts, and that the machinery which had been purchased for the project should be sold to the contractors to such extent as the Minister might consider desirable. It was also decided that the machinery should be disposed of, as far as possible, in composite units and in such manner as to cause the minimum dislocation of work under the scheme.

The machinery for sale was valued by technical officers of the Department of Agriculture and the Office of Public Works jointly and tenders were invited by public advertisement. Sums totalling £163,522 were received in the year ended 31 March, 1954, from sales of items valued at £179,411 and were brought to account as Exchequer extra receipts, together with a sum of £317 realised from the sale of scrap material. Machinery valued at £61,939 and miscellaneous spares and equipment valued at £10,834 were transferred to other Departments. Further receipts from sales of machinery, spare parts, materials and general equipment are brought to account in 1954-55.”

Mr. Ó Cadhla. — With regard to the machinery, apart from the transfer to other Departments, nearly all the machinery was disposed of in three sales organised during the year, and from a test check, I came to the conclusion that the prices realised were well up to the valuations.

Mr. Dempsey.—That is so. The valuation was carried out by the Department’s officers — the engineering staff engaged on the project, with the co-operation of the engineering staff from the Office of Public Works; they placed a valuation on these machines and in the actual sales the price obtained was over 90 per cent. of the valuation for such machinery as was sold.

642. Chairman.—Was the machinery sold to land reclamation contractors exclusively?—I do not think you could say “exclusively.” There were not any rigid conditions, but they were nearly all sold to contractors. They might be doing some civil engineering work as distinct from land project work, but nearly all the machinery was sold to firms engaged in land improvement. The machinery was not generally suitable for much else: drainage ploughs and excavators. In general, most of the buyers would come into the category of firms which undertake land reclamation type of work.

643. Deputy Sheldon.—What happens in a county where there are no contractors? What happens to farmers in such a county who want to avail of the B Scheme?—The Minister did decide to retain portion of the machinery. Generally speaking, this machinery is in units; five of these were retained for Donegal, Mayo and Galway. The idea in retaining them was to ensure that there would be plant in these counties. We find in practice that the plant moves around. Contractors do not merely work within county boundaries.

644. As far as I can make out there was some little difficulty; land owners were being warned that they just could not have the advantage of the B Scheme and I was wondering if the Department had done anything to get around that difficulty? — There is always a time lag. Contractors may be slow to begin. There is a seasonal factor in it too. No one likes to undertake such work in November and December. The general tendency, as indicated by the accounts, shows that farmers themselves are more inclined to take on the jobs and get them done themselves, making their own arrangements.

645. Chairman. — Was any machinery sold that had not been used at all?—I do not think so. There was one batch of Ransom excavators which were only delivered six months before the date of sale, but I think they were all used. Some of the machinery sold was in use for four years almost and some for some months. I do not think there was any that was not used.

646. Deputy Sheldon.—Were there not six excavators transferred to the Office of Public Works?—There were a number of machines transferred to Public Works, some to the Land Commission and some to the Department of Defence.

647. Chairman.—Is the present method of working through contractors better from the point of view of the Department? Is it working out more economically?—I think it is too early to say yet. It is working satisfactorily. Of course, the other arrangement was not so very long in operation and the present method only got into its swing in 1953, so it is scarcely two years in operation yet and there has not been much time to reach a conclusion. It is, however, working satisfactorily.

Paragraph 29 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“With the object of rehabilitating land deficient in soil fertility but not needing the specific works referred to in paragraph 27, a scheme was introduced in 1950-51 to enable occupiers of land to obtain supplies of lime and artificial fertilisers on credit, and to have them spread by the Department. It provides for the testing of land to establish its need of lime and fertilisers on payment by the occupier of 1s. per statute acre. Farmers availing of this scheme are required to deposit at least 10 per cent. of the cost and to repay the balance by means of an addition to their land purchase annuities.”

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—That is for information only.

648. Paragraph 30 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Following certain experiments carried out by Comlucht Siúicre Éireann, Teoranta, on the reclamation of bogland the Minister for Agriculture decided to afford the company financial support for a scheme of reclamation. Under this scheme the company may purchase areas of bogland, and also arrange for the reclamation of small areas of bogland by the occupiers under its direction and supervision. A grant of £16 per statute acre, increased from July, 1953, to £24, becomes payable when the reclaimed land produces a satisfactory crop. The grants paid up to 31st March, 1954, including £52 paid in 1952-53, amounted to £6,574 in respect of 334 acres of bogland reclaimed.”

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—That also is for information only.

649. Chairman.—On what bogs exactly has reclamation been carried out? I take it Gowla would be one of them?

Mr. Dempsey.—The only other one is at Kenmare. A certain amount of reclamation was done at Kenmare over a small area, 17 acres, I think. The main work was done in Gowla area.

650. And the crops are mostly for the purpose of grass meal?—They grew a whole range of crops on some of it. They tried the ordinary crops as well as mint, etc. They have a rather large series of crops more or less in the nature of trials, I understand.

651. Paragraph 31 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Subhead 0.5—Agricultural Produce (Cereals) Acts, 1933 to 1939 and Wheat Order, 1952, etc.

Reference was made in previous reports to arrangements whereby growers who sold wheat of the harvests of the years 1943-47, inclusive, were enabled to obtain, in exchange for dockets which they had received from authorised purchasers of the wheat, fertiliser credit vouchers for 2/6 per barrel of wheat sold. The fertiliser suppliers were recouped the amount of allowances made by them on submission of monthly claims supported by the relevant credit vouchers. Including expenditure of £32,850 charged to this subhead the total paid to fertiliser suppliers in connection with the redemption of the credit vouchers amounted at 31st March, 1954, to £1,306,828. I understand that an appreciable number of dockets are still outstanding.”

Have you anything to add, Mr. Ó Cadhla?

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—I have nothing to add, Mr. Chairman.

652. What is the approximate value of the dockets actually issued?

Mr. Dempsey. — I think the amount claimed and paid is in the neighbourhood of £1,306,000. I take it that is what you have in mind. That is to the end of 1953-54.

Can you tell us roughly how many are still outstanding?—The estimate is that there are in the neighbourhood of 200,000 dockets still outstanding.

653. Paragraph 32 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Subhead P.—Allowances, etc., for Dairy Produce

The charge to this subhead includes a payment to the Butter Marketing Committee of £58,713 in recoupment of the balance of a deficit of £358,381 in the Committee’s trading account for the year ended 31st March, 1953. A payment of £299,668 on account was made from the Dairy Produce (Price Stabilisation) Fund in the year 1952-53 in respect of this deficit which was due mainly to losses on sales of imported butter and expenditure on cold storage of butter for winter consumption. A sum of £63,000 was also paid to the Committee in respect of an anticipated deficit in the trading account for the year ended 31st March, 1954.”

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—That paragraph is for information also.

654. Chairman.—What are the functions of the Butter Marketing Committee at present?

Mr. Dempsey.—Primarily, their function is the cold storage of butter and the ensuring of supplies for the Dublin-Bray area, which is the big consuming area.

655. What were the actual losses on imported butter in 1952-53 and in 1953-54? —In 1953-54 there was a profit made on the New Zealand butter. The surplus was re-exported and sold outside the country; there was a profit of £44,746. In the previous year 1952-53 there was a loss of approximately £400,000 on the butter handled. That loss should, of course, be offset by the subsidies which otherwise would have been payable on home-produced butter at the time.

The butter has, I take it, all been disposed of?—Yes, it has all been sold.

656. Paragraph 33 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General states:—

“Subhead R.—Appropriations-in-Aid.

Reference was made in paragraph 24 of the report on the accounts for 1952-53 to the arrangement whereby Comhlucht Siúicre Eireann, Teoranta, undertook the importation and distribution of superphosphate. Repayable advances totalling £922,717 were made to the company in 1952-53 from voted moneys to finance the scheme and it was provided that these advances should be repaid by periodical remission to the Department of Agriculture of the proceeds of sale less expenses. The amount repaid by the company to 31st March, 1954, including £347,000 received in the year under review and credited to Appropriations-in-Aid, amounted to £387,000, leaving a balance of £535,717 outstanding.”

657. Has all the phosphate been disposed of yet?—I understand that all of it has now been disposed of. The accounts are not yet completed but the last of it has been cleared in the last few months.

658. Deputy Sheldon.—You could not yet give us a figure for the loss?—I could not give a figure for it, but it would be between £400,000 and £500,000, we estimate, at this stage.

659. Chairman.—Paragraph 34 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General states:—

“Dairy Produce (Price Stabilisation) Fund.

The income of the Fund, £222,579, consisted of levies, mainly on home sales of creamery butter and raw cheese.

The payments out of the Fund included £7,637 to the Butter Marketing Committee to meet administrative expenses, and £101,305 to creameries in connection with the Department’s scheme for the cold storage of creamery butter. In order to provide additional margins of 2/4 per cwt. for retailers and 8d. per cwt. for wholesalers on sales of creamery butter, an allowance of 3/- per cwt. was paid to creameries, wholesalers and the Butter Marketing Committee on stocks of creamery butter held on 1st October, 1953, and to creameries on butter produced after that date. These allowances, totalling £56,087, account for the balance of the payments from the Fund.”

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—That is for information only.

660. Chairman.—What is the amount of the levy?

Mr. Dempsey.—The standard levy at the moment is 4d. per cwt. The levy has varied throughout the years and is related to movements in the price of butter.

661. How is the cold storage allowance computed?—It is based on commercial rates and investigations of the costings and tenders from cold store owners. The rate is calculated and the approval of the Department of Finance has to be obtained before it is put into operation.

662. Deputy O’Hara.—Have you any cold storage facilities of your own?—No. Many of the creameries have, of course, cold stores of their own, but the Department has no cold store.

663. Chairman.—On subhead E.2— Veterinary Research — I see that the adaption work at Abbotstown for the new veterinary research laboratories had not progressed far by the end of the year. How is the work getting on at present? —The job is practically complete now. We are almost ready to start transfer. I gather that this may happen before the end of the year or very early in the new year.

664. How was it that the work at Abbotstown was not carried out by the Board of Works?—The Minister for Agriculture decided at the time that it was more expeditious to do it in the way it was done.

665. Who supervised the work?—The Department can call on the Board of Works for supervision. The engineering staff or the architectural staff of the Board of Works would supervise for the Minister on request. We engage an architect on the job as well.

666. Deputy J. Brennan.—On subhead E.3—Subscriptions, etc., to International and other Research Organisations— could we have any indication as to what international research organisations we contribute to?—The principal would be the F.A.O. of the United Nations, which is holding its annual conference at the present time. Then there is E.P.P.O., the International Grassland Association; the International Beef Association, the Commonwealth Bureau Library Service; and there are some veterinary organisations. It is all explained in the subhead.

667. On subhead F.1—Agricultural Schools and Farms—do you prepare any accounts of the working of these farms? —Accounts are presented to the Department’s Accounts Branch in respect of expenditure and receipts, but commercial farm accounts or general farm accounts as usually understood are not prepared in respect of these institutions. Primarily they are teaching and experimental centres and the segregation of the experimental and teaching aspects from the commercial aspects would be well nigh impossible.

668. Deputy O’Hara.—On subhead G.3 —Improvement of Poultry and Egg Production—in view of the substantially reduced supplies of eggs, would it not be possible to reduce the number of inspectors and allot them to other work such as butter production? Egg production has fallen to such an alarming extent that it is hardly necessary for so many people to be engaged?—There are very few officers engaged on egg inspection work alone. Invariably they undertake other work such as in connection with butter. It is a question of the division of the work. Of course, we would hope that the egg position would improve. Supervision is necessary in the case of eggs also because of the export trade. The quality factor is very important. We have an export trade to Continental countries as well as to Great Britain and we must take precautions to ensure that the quality of all exports is of a high standard and inspection is therefore called for.

669. The total quantity of eggs exported to any country this year, including Continental countries, is substantially lower than in other years. I think the export trade has ceased for the present year from three to four months past?— There is the seasonal drop anyhow. There would never be any in the month of November.

670. It is more seasonal this year?— There is no doubt about that. The statistical returns show that the numbers of poultry are substantially down. Of course, that is because prices of eggs in the past year or two have dropped appreciably, at least in our main market.

671. Chairman. — Regarding the exgratia payments referred to in the note to subhead G.3, how did the extra duties arise? — These ex-gratia payments were made to the officers of the committees of agriculture whose services were drawn upon by the Department to do work which would have entailed the employment of additional headquarters staff in administering this poultry scheme. Their committees were asked to approve of their participation in this scheme in addition to their ordinary duties. They had to do a great deal of work on the scheme. It was a saving in one direction in that additional staff had not to be appointed, and it was thought fit to give them an ex-gratia payment when the scheme was completed.

672. On G.4—Temporary Scheme for the growing of Horticultural Crops in the Athlone area—what is the nature of this temporary scheme and why was Athlone selected?—As you probably know, the Athlone area was at one time an intensive seed potato growing district; then the pest eel worm crept into it. Since the only known means of combating that pest is to alternate crops and as these farmers for various reasons were not in a position to adopt a wide rotation—they were depending upon selling their crops —the idea was to introduce them into the growing of other crops. Certain vegetables such as carrots were grown on a large scale and soft fruits and other vegetables were introduced. It is partly educational and partly relief, if I may use the word, and the object is to encourage better methods of cultivation or a wider range of crops in an effort to combat such pests as potato eel worm.

673. On subhead H.—Grants to County Committees of Agriculture—the special grants to encourage the use of fertilisers is a new service for which £29,200 was provided by way of supplementary estimates. Has it met with success?—This was a series of demonstration manurial plots. The extent to which the farmers practice manuring on their grassland and other crops would be the measure of their success. We think they are successful. They certainly created great interest particularly in the manuring of grassland and I think they are successful to that extent. They are really educational, to demonstrate what increased production could be secured by using fertilisers primarily on grassland.

Deputy Sheldon—I would say they are very successful. I have heard a lot of comment in this regard.

674. Deputy Bartley.—On subhead I— Special Agricultural, etc., Schemes—and the portion of the note thereon concerning the heating of glasshouses, is this explained by the possibility of having these areas supplied with rural electrification service?—This question of heating houses spread over rural districts has been under consideration and I think the general opinion is that electricity would be too expensive. Other methods have been tried and various types of boilers and other heating equipment are still under examination; furthermore, the E.S.B. have been examining the project and making investigations. It is a difficult problem to heat isolated houses economically.

Deputy J. Brennan. — One would imagine that the E.S.B. storage heating system whereby the current is given at a creap rate at night would be more economical than any alternative system.

Deputy Sheldon.—The trouble is you get the heat during the day from that system.

Deputy J. Brennan.—You get it at night.

Deputy Sheldon.—It comes on at one o’clock in the morning.

Deputy J. Brennan.—The cheap rate operates from the time the main load goes off and you can have your automatic switch regulated to any particular time you like.

Deputy Sheldon.—I still think it would be much more expensive.

Deputy J. Brennan.—I have always thought it was the cheapest form of heating.

675. Chairman. — Is the glasshouse scheme, generally speaking, a success?— Of course, there is a seasonal aspect. In some seasons, the returns are very good, and in others not so good. There have been some unfavourable seasons and some growers got better returns than others.

676. The growers generally, I presume, are meeting their liability?—Some concessions have had to be made in respect of the contribution, but that was done with the approval of the Department of Finance.

677. Deputy O’Hara.—Is there any system of inspection in relation to tomato growing—the provision of packing and so on in the case of these glasshouses?— They are run more or less co-operatively. They have a central packing station— each unit of houses — and all their tomatoes are sold through contractors. They are packed at central stations and the packing is well done, I understand. There have been no complaints on that head. The crop is marketed in a good condition and in a very satisfactory manner.

678. Deputy Bartley.—With regard to subhead J—National Stud—the National Stud gets capital moneys. Is that not so?

Chairman.—Yes.

Deputy Bartley.—What is the purpose of the provision in the Vote?—The main object of the provision is to give the Minister for Agriculture some control over this property. The company has a licence to carry on the Stud at Tully. The provision in the estimates represents only the rent. Moneys otherwise needed are provided through the Department of Finance for the National Stud company. The lands are rented annually to the company.

679. The £868 is in respect of rent?— Rent only, and of course the National Stud company repay it to the Minister for Agriculture.

680. It is just a formal transaction to give the Minister for Agriculture some authority in relation to the management of the Stud?—To license them annually to carry on the operations for which they are set up.

681. Deputy J. Brennan.—On subhead K.1—Agricultural Societies and Shows, including Miscellaneous Grants-in-Aid— I thought these grants were available only through the county committees?— There are contributions made by the Department in respect of certain livestock—dairy cattle, etc.—classes at shows.

The R.D.S. mainly? — Mainly the R.D.S.—prizes for special dairy classes with a view to encouraging milk production.

682. Chairman.—The full amount of the grant on subhead K.3—Contribution to Irish Countrywomen’s Association — was not paid. On what basis do you pay out this Grant-in-Aid? — In 1953-54 the grant was paid to the organisation on condition that they maintained a certain number of whole-time organisers—ten, to be exact—and paid them certain salaries —at least £5 a week. Apparently the organisation was not in a position to get the ten or to find the extra expenses involved and they did not claim all the sum provided. I should tell the Committee that in the meantime the organisation has put forward an alternative proposal which has been approved by the Department of Finance. I understand that the contribution is to be based on a £1 per £1 system—for every £1 contributed voluntarily to the organisation, the Minister for Agriculture would provide an additional £1. The organisation thought that method would be better than the old method.

683. Deputy J. Brennan. — Towards paying organisers? — Primarily for the organisation of their work. In 1953-54 it was linked up with the maintenance of a certain number of organisers.

684. Chairman. — On subhead M.1 — Miscellaneous Work — do you do the advertising yourself or avail of the Stationery Office? — In the case of display advertisements — semi-pictorial advertisements done largely through the Press—they are done direct through an agent. In the case of all other printing, it goes to the Stationery Office in the ordinary way.

685. On subhead M.2—Fees for Reports on Agricultural Conditions—what kind of reports are these exactly? — These are reports of the yields of crops and market conditions. The Department collect information as regards marketing conditions and publish monthly reports and the statistics division of the Government collect yield returns of all the various crops which are published annually. That is the object—yields of crops and market returns.

686. Deputy Bartley.—The Department is not primarily responsible for the statistics supplied on yields of crops?— That is so.

687. Chairman.—Whom do you employ to make the reports?—The instructors employed by the committees of agriculture mainly. They are well qualified and in a good position to secure these returns.

688. Deputy Sheldon.—With regard to subhead M.3 — Printing of Special Departmental Publications — I take it that these are all done through the Stationery Office?—Practically all, yes— all, I should say.

689. Chairman—Subhead M.4—Loans and Grants for Agricultural Purposes, etc.—what are the conditions of the repayment of these loans? — They would vary. The deposits depend on whether they were stallions, bulls or implements. They varied from one third to one quarter and the repayment in some cases was five years and in other cases two years. In the case of bulls, they were restricted to two years; in the case of stallions five years; and in the case of hand sprayers, it was two years also. They originally started as individual schemes related to the lifetime of the implements or the animals.

690. Are there any losses or bad debts? —Practically none.

691. Deputy Bartley — Does a grant always accompany a loan? — No, not necessarily.

692. Deputy J. Brennan.—On subhead M.M.5—Special Temporary Scheme of Loans for the Purchase of Cattle and Sheep—I take it these are schemes which are just fading out?—That is a special interest-free scheme introduced in the very bad season of 1947-48. The scheme is practically complete. Practically all the money, with the exception of £25, has been collected.

693. Chairman. — Out of a total of roughly?—I think, over £300,000.

694. I take it that the provisions in subheads M.6 and M.7—Improvement of the Creamery Industry and Agricultural Production Consultative Council — are merely token provisions?—That is so.

695. Are there any activities at all under the subheads?—No. They do not arise under M.6. and in the case of M.7, the particular council has not been reconstituted.

696. That is the reason the subhead is held?—Yes. The question of a reconstitution is still under consideration, I understand.

697. Deputy O’Hara.—On subhead M.9 —Land Rehabilitation Project — quite apart from the district offices which you have established in various towns for the district office staff, have you any periodical inspection from headquarters to see if the work is being carried on properly?—Yes; there are what we call regional officers, men who have a certain area to cover and who act as supervisors of the local officers, and when opportunity offers the director or his assistants visit various centres where work is in operation.

698. It has been suggested to me on a few occasions that drainage pipes, for instance, were being used in excess of what were required in certain areas. When you investigate some of these things, however, you find it very difficult to get anybody to come with you and point out where this is going on. That is why I was anxious to know if you had any independent inspections? — The district officers are subject to inspection by senior officers. When it comes to drains, there is room for differences of opinion as to how far apart they should be made and how many tiles should be used.

The implication was that somebody was trying to sell drainage pipes to somebody else?—The initial value is so very low that there is no great inducement.

699. Chairman.—On subhead M.10— Ground Limestone Subsidy—do you pay the full cost of delivery? — Yes. The payment is made to C.I.E. That is the arrangement. They pay the agreed rates for delivery the entire distance, subject to a 40 mile limitation, except in certain areas. The exception is in those areas in which there are no limestone grinding plants within a 40 mile radius. It caters for isolated areas and areas which have no limestone in them—Wicklow and Wexford are examples. There are not any limestone plants in either of these areas and, therefore, there have been longer haulage charges in those districts.

700. Deputy Bartley. — Are local committees of agriculture carrying on lime schemes as well either to supplement this national scheme or in place of it?— I do not think so—with the exception of Cork, which operates a sea-sand scheme, the main purpose of which is to provide lime. Kerry County Committee of Agriculture were also operating such a scheme on a small scale. I think they have ceased to operate that scheme. Otherwise, as far as I know, there are no lime subsidy schemes operated by committees of agriculture. There are some special arrangements under this scheme where the islands get the ground limestone under special conditions. This is a special case.

701. Deputy Sheldon.—With regard to subhead M.11—Prevention of Contagious Abortion and other Diseases in Cattle— the scheme does not appear to have worked too well in that year. Has the position improved?—Strange to say, the position seems to be rather static. The numbers have not varied very much. In the first year, when it was entirely free, the numbers were very great. Since then, they seem to be rather steady.

702. I notice you are continuing to make the same provision, or roughly the same provision: it is down now to £13,000 as compared with what it was at that time. If the current expenditure keeps on at the same level, is it wise to maintain the grant so very much higher? I think we can get a peculiar point of view by the public on these things. If the Department were to cut the grant and announce they had cut the grant it might stir up interest and some people might say: “I must get in on this before it disappears altogether”.

Deputy Bartley.—The public have no need for it: maybe that is the explanation.

Chairman.—Has the Accounting Officer any further remarks on it?—It is a contagious abortion vaccine. It is very desirable and the Minister for Agriculture is very keen that it should be used. Possibly in the first season people were attracted to using it widely. It was free at the time. A 1/- a dose is charged now for it. The very fact that a steady number of people are using it each year shows that they may be restricting its use to the number of heifers they intend adding to the herd.

703. Deputy J. Brennan. — Is any action taken under this subhead in relation to trichomoniasis or is it regarded as being capable of being dealt with only by veterinary surgeons?—That is the main way of dealing with it.

704. Deputy Bartley. — How does a farmer set about availing himself of this grant?—It is operated through the veterinary surgeons and scales of fees are laid down for injections. The fees are comparatively small especially where farmers co-operate to get animals done in numbers at one centre. The vaccine is provided to veterinary surgeons at 1/- a dose.

705. Take, for instance, an inaccessible place where it is not convenient for a veterinary surgeon to go and where the farmers are able to apply these doses themselves, can they get the doses at less than the retail price?—There is no subsidy on the price of the vaccines.

Deputy J. Brennan. — The subsidy, then, is payable to the veterinary surgeon?

706. Chairman.—The Accounting Officer did not express any opinion on Deputy Sheldon’s point regarding the overestimation or the non-expenditure of the grant. Deputy Sheldon mentioned that it might be desirable to threaten or to say that the Department were going to cut down on this grant in view of the fact that the expenditure on the subhead is so small. Has the Department of Finance any opinion to express on that?

Mr. Breathnach. — It is offset in Appropriations-in-Aid by an almost equivalent amount: I think it is £12,500. The difference between the two is not very much and it is intended mainly to cover advertising and publicity.

Mr. Dempsey.—The Minister is hopeful that the introduction of the bovine T.B. scheme will give a fillip to this scheme also. It is hoped that farmers under the T.B. scheme will also see that their animals are vaccinated against contagious abortion and that this scheme may become more popular again.

707. Deputy O’Hara.—With regard to subhead 12—Artificial Insemination of Livestock—how many centres have you in the whole country for artificial insemination?—At the present time, the Department has main centres at Grange Ballyhaise and Clonakilty. There are sub-centres at a few of the creameries in Cavan. Then there is Enniscorthy, Mitchelstown, Ballyclough, Clarecastle, Castleisland and Dovea. A number are privately owned. The main centres under the Department at the present time are at Grange Ballyhaise and Clonakilty with their sub-centres.

708. What about the privately-owned ones? Have you supervision there? — There is supervision under the Act enabling the Minister to inspect the premises and the animals; therefore there is control over the premises and the animals.

709. Are any grants payable to such private people?—No.

710. Deputy J. Brennan.—What about the co-operative societies who establish stations?—They are self-supporting.

711. Deputy O’Hara.—With regard to subhead O.3—Destructive Insects and Pests Acts, Black Scab in Potatoes Orders etc.—are there many areas in Ireland affected by this Black Scab? — About three or four small areas.

712. The number of areas has not increased.

713. Your efforts to stamp it out have been successful?—It has been kept within bounds. There has not been any extension in recent years.

714. Deputy Bartley. — Is it a soil affection?—It affects the potatoes but unfortunately it remains in the soil.

715. Deputy J. Brennan. — Certain varieties are more susceptible than others, are they not?—They all act as carriers. It gets into the soil and remains there for a long time. Even though you may continue to grow a variety that does not show the disease, it does not mean that the disease leaves the soil: that is the unfortunate part of it.

716. Chairman.—With regard to subhead O.O.5—Grain Storage (Loans) Act, 1951—what has held up the issue of these loans? Is it a fact that you have not yet issued any loans? — A considerable number of these loans have been issued in 1954 and 1955. The delay in the earlier years was purely legal. Getting title in respect of the premises of the applicant did present a problem but a number of loans have been issued.

717. With regard to item No. 16 in the details of the Appropriations-in-Aid — Sums recoverable in respect of the salaries, etc., of officers seconded to the Dairy Disposal Co., Ltd., the Dublin District Milk Board, the Pigs and Bacon Commission, the Irish Potato Marketing Co., Ltd., etc.—the sums recovered were in respect of salaries of officers loaned to various quasi government companies. Some of these companies submit their accounts to the Public Accounts Committee: others, I understand, do not. Who audits the accounts of the other companies such as the Irish Potato Marketing Co., Ltd.?—They have their own auditors.

718. What is their source of capital?— It varies according to the company. You are probably familiar with the Dairy Disposal Company, Ltd. Their capital was advanced from Public Funds. The Dublin Milk Board have levies on the sales of milk.

719. What general control do you exercise over them? — They are not directly under the control of the Department. Most of them, I think, are required to place their accounts before the Oireachtas.

720. Deputy Sheldon. — But not the Irish Potato Marketing Company, Ltd.? —It has now to submit its accounts to the Oireachtas.

721. Deputy J. Brennan.—Does that mean laying the accounts on the table of the House?—Yes.

722. Deputy Sheldon.—There is a note on page 69 of the Appropriation Accounts to which I would like to refer. It concerns expenditure under subhead M.9, incurred by having the land reclamation staff clean an ornamental lake. It seems an extraordinary use to which to put the staff of the land reclamation project. Of course it has been noted specially, so apparently the Department thought it was unusual too. Was this a question of draining the lake or anything like that? —No. This concerns the lake at Johnstown Castle which was handed over to the Government subject to certain conditions such as maintenance of the buildings, grounds, etc. This included the maintenance of these lakes which had become an eyesore and had to be cleaned. Various attempts were made to get contractors to do the job but there was great difficulty and the job had to be disposed of in this way.

723. Deputy Bartley.—With regard to the Statement of Loan Securities and amounts repayable to the Department, etc., I should like to refer to the item concerning loans for the erection of fencing in congested districts?—There were no loans recently, the work being done on a cash basis.

724. Deputy J. Brennan.—No grants? —No. All of this statement deals with loans.

Deputy Sheldon.—I suppose the item mentioned by Deputy Bartley is the remnant of an old scheme.

Deputy Bartley.—Yes. There was such a scheme.

725. Chairman. — With regard to this Statement of Loans, Securities, could you say if you have any bad debts?— No, we have not. Our experience in that regard has been satisfactory. It has been very satisfactory indeed.

Deputy Sheldon. — There is a note at the foot of page 69 of the Appropriations Accounts on the special scheme (subhead MM.5) where the amount written off was only £1, made up of six sums varying from twopence to 5/6. That is fair comment, I think.

726. Deputy Bartley.—With regard to the item in the Statement of Loan Securities dealing with sundry purchases of bulls under special schemes for congested districts, the maximum sum payable is £18,633 and a note at the bottom says this sum is reducible, if certain conditions are complied with, to £6,568. What, in general, are these conditions? —The system really has survived from some years ago. The applicants get the bulls on undertaking to pay certain sums. These are subject to deductions if they maintain the animals satisfactorily. It is, in effect, a safeguard to ensure that the bulls are kept in the areas in which they have been placed and that the animals are properly maintained. It has been a regular procedure over the years.

727. Chairman.—With regard to the Account of Receipts and Payments in respect of the General Cattle Diseases Fund, the balance has gone down from £25,000 odd in 1953 to £7,000 odd in 1954. Is it from this fund you propose to work the tuberculosis scheme?—No. The T.B. scheme is being met from voted moneys at the moment and it is intended that it will be financed from the Grant Counterpart Fund and from the National Development Fund. The scheme will be financed from these two funds.

728. It is being operated only in three counties?—It is also open to individual applicants throughout the country. There are three intensive areas.

729. How do you intend to deal with reactors in the future?—That is a very difficult question to answer. It is really the biggest problem in the elimination of bovine T.B.

730. Is it your own experience so far that you are extending the scheme to individual applicants? Of course the conditions attached to individual applicants would require very high outlay? — It depends on how many reactors he may have in the initial stages and what success he may have in rearing or procuring animals that will not react— otherwise maintaining the standard. If he has to go into the open market to buy new stock in order to maintain a disease-free herd there is the risk that he may buy animals which might not be up to the required standard.

731. Do the Department intend to enforce the fencing regulation in the case of individual applicants who are outside the scheduled areas?—Where everybody is not participating in the scheme there is a big onus on the individual participant to take precautions because he has most to lose. He has got to have the co-operation of the neighbouring farmers.

732. Deputy Bartley.—Is slaughter the main method of reducing tuberculosis in cattle?—Yes, I suppose it is.

733. Chairman.—Last year we had a discussion on the question of revising the form of the Estimate.

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—The Accounting Officer and myself agreed to postpone the discussion owing to the proposal to set up an Institute of Agriculture. We thought it better to wait and see what effect the setting up of the Institute would have on the Estimate.

VOTE 28—FISHERIES.

Mr. J. Dempsey further examined.

734. Chairman.—Paragraph 35 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General states:—

“Subhead F.5—Compensation, etc.

Compensation amounting to £3,075 was paid to owners of nets under Section 35 of the Fisheries Act, 1939, which provides for the restriction of the use of nets in fresh water and for payment of compensation to the owners. In accordance with the provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of the Freshwater Fisheries (Prohibition of Netting) Act, 1951, interest was paid on compensation awarded and amounted in the year under review to £273.”

735. Deputy Mrs. Crowley.—Paragraph 35 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General deals with compensation, etc. I understand this matter is going very slowly. Is there any likelihood it will be finished up soon? — There are very few cases, I understand something like eight or nine, at the moment resting with the Department but there is a fair number of cases in the hands of the Chief State Solicitor. They are longstanding cases and are very intricate from the legal point of view. The number of cases awaiting settlement with the Fisheries Branch are very few.

736. Chairman.—Paragraph 36 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General states:—

“Sections 2 and 4 of the Act of 1951 authorise the Minister for Agriculture with the consent of the Minister for Finance to make ex-gratia grants in certain circumstances to persons not entitled to compensation under the Act of 1939, the aggregate of such grants not to exceed £60,000. Pursuant to these sections grants amounting to £9,525 were paid to owners and lessees and £233 to employees in the year under review. The grants paid under the authority of these sections amounted at 31 March, 1954, to £31,387.”

737. In what circumstances would a grant be outside the 1939 Act and within the 1951 Act?—I understand that under the 1939 Act the conditions were very rigid and there were some difficult cases —hard luck cases where employees were part-time on sick leave and could not be catered for. Under the 1951 Act, it is possible to make ex-gratia payments not possible under the 1939 Act, so that it is making it a bit easier to deal with such cases.

738. Deputy J. Brennan.—Is there any limitation to the amount of the grant to be made under the Act?—I understand the practice in relation to workers is to give a maximum of two years’ wages.

739. Chairman.—Are there many cases remaining to be scheduled? — There are only eight or nine resting with the Fisheries Branch, but a number of cases were originally submitted to the legal officers. These are very intricate and I do not know how they are faring. It is apparently not so easy to prove title to a fishery.

740. Paragraph 37 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General states:—

“Subhead H—Appropriations-in-Aid.

The Sea Fisheries Association was dissolved on 24 April, 1952, under the Sea Fishing Act, 1952, which provided for the transfer of all the liabilities of the Association at the date of dissolution to An Bord Iascaigh Mhara. As will be seen from the account, sums totalling £21,000 which were received from An Bord in the year ended 31 March, 1954, in repayment of advances made to the Association were credited to Appropriations-in-Aid.”

741. Are the Board’s accounts presented to Dáil Éireann?—Yes.

742. Who audits them? — The Board have their own auditors.

Deputy Bartley.—Geoghegan and Company.

743. Chairman.— Paragraphs 38, 39 and 40 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General state:—

“The total advances to the Sea Fisheries Association for boats and gear to 24 April, 1952, amounted to £408,500 and the half-yearly instalments of annuities set up to repay these advances amounted to £255,648 at 31 March, 1954. Sums transferred to the Department in payment of the instalments amounted to £196,450 including £16,722 credited to this subhead. The repayments were, therefore, in arrear on 31 March, 1954, to the extent of £59,198 as compared with £48,201 on 31 March, 1953.

The total advances for general development made to the Association up to 24 April, 1952, amounted to £63,215. These advances are repayable over a period of twenty years by half-yearly instalments covering principal and interest, and instalments amounting to £4,278 which fell due in the year under review comprise the balance of the £21,000 credited to this subhead.

Extra Receipts payable to Exchequer.

Reference was made in paragraph 40 of the previous report to the joint acquisition by the Minister for Agriculture and the Ministry of Commerce for Northern Ireland of all fishing rights in the tidal portions of the Lough and River Foyle and of its tributary the River Faughan, and to the setting up of the Foyle Fisheries Commission. Paragraph 4 of schedule 3 to the Foyle Fisheries Act, 1952, provides that any surplus moneys for the time being in the hands of the Commission shall be disposed of in such manner as the Minister for Agriculture and the Ministry of Commerce for Northern Ireland may from time to time jointly direct. In accordance with this provision, surplus moneys amounting to £2,600 in the hands of the Commission at 30 September, 1952, were surrendered in the year under review and this administration’s share, £1,300, has been brought to account as an Exchequer extra receipt.”

744. Under paragraph 38, the position regarding arrears appears to be deteriorating. Are you getting anything done about it? — I understand the general question of dealing with arrears is under discussion between the Fisheries Branch and the Department of Finance at the moment with a view to clarifying the position.

745. With regard to subhead E.4— Whale Fisheries Act, 1937 — what does this provision cover?—The Government is a member of an international organisation which controls whale fishing. While there are no whales in Irish waters at the present time, this makes provision for the Government’s fulfilling of its obligations to this organisation.

746. Deputy J. Brennan.—It does not deal with sharks?—No.

747. Chairman. — Has there been any expenditure in recent years? — Not for some years, I understand.

748. On subhead F.2 — Artificial Propagation of Fish—how are the contributions to privately owned hatcheries calculated?—Payment was made mainly on the basis of the ova hatched.

749. On subhead F.3—State Fisheries— which particular fisheries are you referring to here?—These are Shean, Mayo; Lagduff, Mayo; and Owenea, Glenties.

750. On subhead H. — Appropriations-in-Aid—with regard to item No. 9 in the details—what are the main receipts falling under this heading — Miscellaneous Receipts?—This item refers to the salary of an officer of the Fisheries Branch who was seconded to An Bord Iascaigh Mhara to act as manager.

751. Deputy J. Brennan.—With regard to Extra Receipts payable to Exchequer, what is the position in regard to the levy on salmon, which is discontinued? By what means will the extra money be provided which was estimated to be produced by the levy?—It will have to be voted.

The Estimates were based on the estimated income from that levy. I was wondering what alternative means would be arranged to produce the required income?—It will have to be voted under subhead F.1.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned.