I think Deputy Johnson is actually in possession, but if you will permit me, and if he will permit me, I would like to say that the President referred to a possible discrepancy in certain prices I gave here in respect of certain foodstuffs. I would like to say, briefly, lest it might cause confusion, that there was not that discrepancy he imagined, because the market prices to which I was referring were dead-weight prices.
COST OF LIVING.
The following Motion stood in the name of Mr. Darrell Figgis:—
"Having regard to the fact that foodstuffs produced in Ireland may be bought more cheaply in England than in Ireland; and
Having regard to the fact that the general fall in price to the producer of such foodstuffs, and of other commodities necessary to livelihood, has not been accompanied by a similar fall in price to the consumer; and
Having regard to the probability that these disproportions are the cause of much discontent, and are frustrating the development of industry on a reasonable basis of comfort to the worker and economic profit to the employer;"
To move, that a Committee be at once appointed, to be known as "The Cost of Living Committee," and that the terms of reference be as follows:—
"To set forth a list of articles or commodities necessary to livelihood; to enquire into the prices available for such articles or commodities to the producer; to enquire into the prices being paid for such articles or commodities by the consumer; and to report if there be any undue disproportion betwen these two scales of prices, and, if so, to recommend the best measures to be taken to end that disproportion."
Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS
Mr. THOMAS JOHNSON
The Motion moved by Deputy Darrell Figgis had a reference to a difference between the price of Irish-produced food in Ireland as compared with England; the difference between the price that the producer obtained for these commodities and the price which the consumer bought them at—and his proposal was, that having regard to these things, a Committee be appointed, to be known as "The Cost of Living Committee," the terms of reference of which are:—
"To set forth a list of articles or commodities necessary to livelihood; to enquire into the prices available for such articles or commodities to the producer; to enquire into the prices being paid for such articles or commodities by the consumer; and to report if there be any undue disproportion between these two scales of prices, and, if so, to recommend the best measures to be taken to end that disproportion."
As I read that, it is a proposal to do two things that are really quite distinct, and both of which are very important indeed. The President made reference to certain proposals that were in the mind of the Minister for Industry and Commerce, and hoped he would produce a motion to set up local Committees, but I submit local Committees in this matter are not sufficient. As I said, the matter is divided into two parts, and I will deal with the profiteering side of it first. Deputy Figgis instanced the relative prices of beef, as obtained by the farmer and as paid by the consumer, and he adduced figures which, I think, will stand the test of enquiry, to show that there is a very great disproportion—an undue disproportion—to the ordinary common observer. There is a similar disproportion—perhaps greater disproportion—when we deal with vegetable products. I think there is an extravagant difference in nearly every commodity that is bought by the average man and woman—working class, middle class or upper class—in the city and in the country generally. Deputy Figgis's proposal deals with articles necessary to livelihood. Well, there may be a restriction in that, but I do not think it is desirable to make that very restricted reference. Articles that are necessary may be defined by the Governor of a gaol, but there are articles which are commonly consumed, which ought to be considered in this matter, as well as articles that are considered necessary. There is an item, and while I can speak of it without prejudice—or perhaps that is too much to say—it is not without prejudice (I happen to be a teetotaller), but there is an item which enters into the common consumption of a great proportion of the people of this country, in which there is a very great disproportion, so great a disproportion between the cost of production and the cost to the consumer, that it is an outrage upon the public opinion of the country. No doubt, the Finance Minister, as Finance Minister, is very intimately concerned with this particular problem; but after his desires are satisfied, as Finance Minister—and I emphasise that—we have the immense profits that are made by the manufacturers, and what are, I think, the immense profits made by the retailers. Stout is an item which enters into the common consumption of very many people in this country, and very many temperate people believe that it is practically a necessity of their lives, and there is no doubt whatever that there are tremendously exorbitant charges in respect of that particular item of common consumption. I am forced to recognise this, that when we are dealing with profiteering, we are dealing with a very loose term. People speak of profiteering as if there was some figure which was normal, beyond which it was a crime to make profits. I do not know what the normal rate of profit might be, and I do not know what profiteering is, except that it is something beyond the normal, and the people that are emphasising the evils of profiteering ought to go a little further and examine what is meant by profiteering. If they wish to interfere with profiteering, are they willing to interfere with the rights of the farmer, the tradesman, the manufacturer, to take the best advantage they can of the market before them? Now, farmers complain of profiteering. Quite rightly, but when you are interfering with profiteering, you are interfering with the right of the seller to take the best advantage he can of the markets. I think it is necessary to do that. I want complainants of the evil of profiteering to recognise that that is one of the implications. I remember a few years ago coming across a Canadian trade paper, and there was a certain advocacy for capturing the British market with certain qualities of fancy soap. It was very interesting to me to read of how the analysis of cost was made up in this trade paper. The article was sold retail for 1/3, and the experts in this business summed it up something like this:—Retailer's profit so much, freight, duties, cartage, carriage, expenses so much, cost of package so much, right down the list, until the cost of the soap stood at 1½d. The accumulation of all the other charges raised the price to the retailer to 1/3. That was not put forward as an abnormal thing at all; it was the normal process of business. I want to suggest that when you are dealing with profiteering you are going to deal with that particular kind of thing, and the accumulation of charges upon the first charge as between the producer and the consumer. We learned during the Railway Commission, and that, perhaps, is quite a mild example, that the actual services cost about £62 and the remaining part of £100 paid for interest on Capital invested. That is, out of every £100 the community paid for railway services, about £62 or £63—I am speaking of pre-war—went to the cost of running the services, and the remainder to paying interest on Capital. I believe one of the explanations of profiteering, as it is called, lies in the fact that there are nearly three times too many people engaged merely in distribution. There are about three times too many shops in the country, and each shop-keeper looks for the profit which will enable him on a small turnover to make a satisfactory living. Now with this invitation to examine what is meant by profiteering, I still approve of the desire that a Committee should be set up to deal with the question on a national scale, that to be supplemented by local Committees to deal with the evil in its local application. I want that Committee to have some powers to interfere. I believe that it is absolutely necessary before we can diagnose the evils that confront the country that there should be a probing, a close inquiry into these evils. There is another aspect of this case, as indicated in Deputy Figgis's motion. It is that the Committee shall set forth a list of the articles or commodities necessary to livelihood. That again, I believe, is a very desirable thing to have done by an authoritative Committee. The President told us inaccurately that the "Cost of Living Report" already gives a list of the things that are necessary to livelihood. That is an error; the Cost of Living Report does no such thing. It is just as well we should understand that the Cost of Living Report does not purport to do any such thing. It only shows the rate of increase in prices between the years 1914 and 1922 of certain groups of articles, but I believe it is desirable we should have some indication from an authoritative body of what is necessary for a reasonable standard of comfort for a family in this country. Inquiries of that kind have been made by amateurs, by groups in different parts of the country, by individuals in Dublin and Cork, and by authoritative inquirers (of course not authoritative in the sense that they were officials), but very valuable private inquiries were made in England a few years ago. It is desirable that an inquiry should be made in Ireland as to the cost of maintaining a reasonable standard of life by a workman according to some conceptions of civilised decency, and very much depends on the result of such an inquiry. Such an inquiry, in my view, should be conducted partly on the basis of medical expert knowledge of the physiological requirements, and by sociologists, who would be able to understand what are the requirements of decent existence. I have no doubt that the Army, for instance, has by a rule of thumb, or by a more scientific method, fixed in its mind a standard of food requirements for its soldiers. It would be interesting to know the retail cost of such a ration to-day. The ration as I have found of the British Army would cost at retail prices to-day 18/5. I do not know what the ration of the Irish Army at retail prices would cost to-day. I imagine from what I have heard that it is rather more liberal than that provided to the British soldier, yet I can imagine it is not too liberal, and, again, I imagine that the carter who is doing hard work is equally entitled to that quality of ration, and his family is entitled to something approximating to it, commensurate with the amount of physical labour they are engaged in. We have something like a scientific ration, I suppose, established in the workhouses. I happen to have been able to obtain a ration scale that would be provided to an adult pauper inmate and four young children. These inmates do some little labour, I think they are known as pauper inmate attendants. They are given a little more than the ordinary pauper inmate, who is not doing any work at all, and the particular ration for that family would cost at to-day's price £1 12s. Od., or just 1½d. less than that.
Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS
Per day?
Mr. JOHNSON
No, per week. They are doing no arduous work of course, and this ration does not include any luxuries, no butter, for instance, and a comparatively small amount of meat, quite a bare ration. Now, these are not, perhaps, scientific, but they do indicate what in the minds of the people who fixed these rations was requisite for the particular class of citizen, a soldier, on the one hand, and the workhouse inmate on the other hand. For an officer in the workhouse—I am speaking now of Belfast workhouse—the pre-war ration that was allowed to an officer, who would be considered, perhaps, fairly comparable with the workman outside, is valued at 15/9. Now we have the right to assume, in basing anything in the way of wages upon prices, the family as a unit. I ask if any member will dispute that proposition, that in considering wages you have to consider the family as a unit.
Mr. GOREY
On a point of order, is not this altogether outside the terms of reference. This discussion which Deputy Johnson is leading us into?
Mr. THOMAS JOHNSON
If the Deputy will read the resolution, he will find that it is entirely within the terms of reference.
AN LEAS CHEANN COMHAIRLE
I think he is inside the terms of reference. This is on the cost of living.
Mr. THOMAS JOHNSON
I am sure Deputy Gorey and his friends would be with me entirely in desiring that there should be some kind of authoritative exposition of what was a reasonable minimum standard of life for a man in this country. If such were set forth, with something like official backing, it would enable farmers, traders, merchants, manufacturers and workers to have some solid basis from which to begin their bargaining. I suggest also, that it would go a long way towards meeting some of the problems that are indicated in this particular resolution. If all families in this country were provided with a ration which physiologists would reckon as requisite to their healthy sustenance and decent comfort, the market for farmers' produce in this country would be immensely increased, and we would get over much of the difficulty of finding a suitable market. I submit in support of the proposition to appoint such a Committee, that it should have terms of reference pretty wide to enquire into these two things. Perhaps two Committees would be requisite, but at any rate, in view of the terms of the proposition, I say that a Committee to inquire into what is necessary to maintain a reasonable standard of life, apart from prices altogether, what is requisite in the way of commodities, and then an additional enquiry into the profiteering side of the proposal, to find out where the great difference comes in between the sum of money obtained by the producer and the price which the consumer has to pay. I believe that if that is done, and is done carefully with official sanction, it would go a long way towards the solving of many problems that are likely to affect us within the next year or two.
Mr. D.J. GOREY
I rise to support the proposition of Deputy Figgis. Wherever we turn, we see that the price of raw materials as produced in Ireland, or anything produced in Ireland, whether foodstuffs or other necessities of life, are down below 1914 prices. If we ask for the finished article, whether it be food, clothes, or anything else, we find that it is over 100 p.c. dearer to-day than it was in 1914. Deputy Johnson has drawn a parallel between the price of barley and the price of drink. He is quite right. Barley to-day is something to set us thinking. There are about 1,600,000 to 1,800,000 barrels of barley estimated as the crop in Ireland this year. We can find a market in Ireland for not more than 600,000. There will be anything between a million and 1,200,000 barrels of Irish barley for which a market cannot be found as a brewing article, and that will have to be used as a foodstuff or something else. We still see "the trade," as we heard yesterday, I think it was, with balance sheets containing enormous profits that are made on a vastly decreased output. I understand—I do not know how true the figures are—that in the big brewery firm in this city, where they used to have 22 brews in the week, they can now do with five, and still their balance sheet is maintained. We understand they have a supply in their stores and in the malt of enough grain for 17 months. That is the position as regards to the growers of barley. With regard to the price of drink, and I am in the same boat as Deputy Johnson, I never drink, and I do not know what the price is.
Mr. JOHNSON
We agree in some things.
Mr. GOREY
Some things I am caught in, but very seldom. Now, what of the wholesale price of potatoes. I am quite confident that potatoes this year will be sold at anything from 7s. to 10s. per barrel of 20 stone, down the country. I do not know what price they are likely to fetch retail, in Dublin or elsewhere, but in the country we have had a good crop of potatoes, and I understand—and I do not think I will be wrong—that 10s. would be about the price wholesale, or 6d. per stone. That is, that 6d. will be our price, but I do not think we shall reach it. Wheat is at present 22s. 6d. per barrel for corn that is suitable for grinding, but a considerable proportion, a heavy proportion of the wheat will not be fit for bread. That portion that is fit will fetch about 22/6 for 20 st. The general public are better judges of the price of bread than I am. I do not know what it is. We never buy bread in our house; we always make our own, and eat it. Vegetables and fruit—we know the prices they are fetching wholesale. We know the price that a barrel of grapes or a barrel of apples fetches in the country. If you go into a retailer here the price that will be asked will astonish you. Go into a draper—and now I come to a question we ought to know about. I am speaking from experience of the last two months. I went into a friend of mine for a suit of clothes, and he named £7 15s. Od. as the price. I said I could get them much cheaper in Dublin, or in England, if I happened to be there. "Oh," he said, "I can send that to Leeds and get it made, and it would come back and only cost £4 15s. Od."
A LABOUR DEPUTY
Made by Jewmen.
Mr. GOREY
Now, it strikes us all, and the poor people more particularly, this system of curtailing output, of making one suit of clothes in the week and making no more. I hope this inquiry will take in the whole aspect of the case. There is blame all round, and I hope they will not be afraid to apportion the blame all round. Everybody knows the price of wool, or ought to know it. For two years we have been unable to sell wool and we could not get 2d. per pound on it, and could not sell it at any price. To-day, we are getting about 6d. per lb. and no more, for the majority of Irish wool. That is the position of the country. Hides for making boots could scarcely find a market for the last two years. Beef—and I regret to say that very little of our good beef raised in Ireland is ever eaten in Ireland, at least in the parts of the provinces that I know, a young beast is scarcely ever killed. Nothing dies there in youth and innocence; they nearly all die of old age. Still, the price that you are asked for this article will astonish you. I have known contracts put in within the last three months—and they ought to be within the knowledge of the Commander-in Chief, because they come under his department—at 5¾d. and 6d. a pound. They are the contracts in the barracks. Yet you will be asked over the counter for 1s. 3d. and 1s. 4d., and perhaps in some places in Dublin 1s. 10d. a pound for the same article. The same would apply to milk. I want you sensible people in the Dáil to take a look round. Wherever you see wasps and flies, you may always be sure there is honey about, and where you see a big element of the community taking up a particular line for the purpose of making a living. you will always find that big profits are to be made there. For instance, look at the number of people who have taken up the publichouse business, and the greengrocers' business. There must be money there. Milk vending is getting very fashionable in Dublin at present. If ever there was an inquiry needed, it is an inquiry over this matter. I hope it will lead to something; it ought to lead to something. I do not wonder at the poor people rising up in rebellion, or at the farming community rising up. I have given you a list of the wholesale prices at which they are selling the product of tillage. We were faced with the silly proposition, a few weeks ago, of compulsory tillage. I do not wonder at the farmers of Ireland rising up in rebellion, or the poor people rising up in rebellion. Something is radically wrong, and I hope this Committee will remedy it.
Sir JAMES CRAIG
I am at a disadvantage, because I was not present at the opening of the discussion. I had intended to speak to the motion, and to support Deputy Figgis' resolution, because I think anything that the Government are able to do should be done to bring down the cost of living. I see great difficulties, however, before them. If it were possible to arrange in two parallel lines the actual cost to the producer and the actual cost to the consumer, it would be fairly easy to fix a fair and equitable percentage that the retailer or distributor should seek or should gain. Deputy Figgis' resolution frightened me when I read it first, because I did not know what he meant to cover by the words, "commodities necessary to livelihood." Deputy Johnson has already alluded, to some extent, to that. One man is not content, or would not think he could live, unless he had his bottle of stout; another man cannot digest his dinner unless he gets a glass of whiskey; other people say they cannot live unless they are clothed; others cannot live through the winter without a fire. All these things have to be considered. On one occasion I attended a little girl in hospital and I produced for her consumption all the most elegant articles of food I could command, but she was not content and expressed a desire to get home. I asked her why she wanted to go home and why she would not eat the grand things I had provided for her, and she replied she wanted pig's cheek and cabbage. As Deputy Johnson has pointed out to us the thing for the Government to determine upon is, what are the articles most commonly in use. I am going to take the question of bread, and I am going to show the difficulty there would be in determining whether the producer would receive a proper profit, and whether the retailer or distributor also received his profit. We all admit that bread is probably the most important of the ordinary articles of food. Bread was brought down about a fortnight ago to 5¼d. for the two-pound loaf; in Belfast the two-pound loaf is 5d. That means that on each sack of flour. of 280 lbs., the master baker in Dublin is making a profit of 3s. 9d. over what the master bakers in Belfast are making. Why should this be so? I do not know; I am told it is because the cost of labour is greater in Dublin than in Belfast. If that be so, I take it that is a fair answer to the question. I go a little closer to the subject and tell you the actual amount paid by the consumer of the loaves baked from each sack of flour of 280 lbs. The actual amount paid is £3 18s. 9d. I do not know what the master baker pays for his flour; it may be possibly around £2 per sack. If it be that, then the question is, is the £1 18s. 9d. too much profit for the master baker to ask in respect of his premises, his machinery, his labour, and in respect of the men who distribute the bread throughout the city. These are points upon which this Committee would be freely entitled to make enquiry. I admire, and have admired at all meetings of the Dáil, the great dignity and restraint with which Deputy Johnson has dealt with matters upon which he felt very deeply. When I come to the question of milk, I think I will find it extremely hard to keep myself from saying things that had better perhaps not be said. After bread, milk is the most important article of food. It is the most important article of food as far as children are concerned. What is the position of affairs in Dublin to-day? A dairyman with a most excellent stable of cows, everything clean and everything done so that it could be inspected by anyone, has a contract with one of the largest hospitals in Dublin. The contract price is 1s. 6d. per gallon, or 4½d. per quart. In the summer time if he is able to give the milk at less he reduces the price, or else gives extra quantity. That man is not selling his milk through the city. He is content, and is well off, with the profit on 1s. 6d. per gallon. But what is the state of affairs? I am paying 8d. per quart for milk, or 2s. 8d. per gallon. A great number of these men—I think Deputy Gorey has alluded to the matter —are getting milk from the country farmers. What are they paying? 1s. 2d. a gallon, I take it. They have the effrontery to charge the poor people in the city, myself included, 2s. 8d. a gallon, or 8d. a quart. That is preposterous—quite preposterous. In addition to that, they are not satisfied. They add Vartry water, or sometimes dirty water. In some cases it is not even Vartry water, and they charge 8d. a quart for the Vartry water or the dirty water that they get out of their taps. I think the question of milk is one of the most important things the Government should enquire into. I now come to the question of potatoes. I have no objection, in the wide world, to the man who distributes the potatoes getting a fair and decent profit for the work he puts in, in the distributing of them, and where potatoes are bought from a farmer at sixpence per stone and sold at nine-pence per stone, I do not object to that. It is too much certainly, but it is not an extravagant profit, but we find that the farmer has only received fourpence for the potatoes for which we are asked to pay tenpence. I was recently paying one shilling per stone for any potatoes that were brought into my house. For these, the producer is not getting more than sixpence at the outside. I now come to deal with articles of a perishable nature, such as fruit, fish, etc., and I shall say a word about cabbage in a moment. With regard to fruit here is an illustration of exorbitant prices: Forty pounds of raspberries were, this summer, sent to my house from a farm near Drogheda; no price was fixed; it was left to the farmer, who was not asked to make any reduction. The price in the shops at that time was 2s. 6d. per pound. When the bill came to my house, 10½d. was the charge made by the lady who had the option of fixing her own price and the cost of carriage on those raspberries amounted only to something like 3/4d. per pound, so that we had the raspberries at 11¼d. per pound, whereas we would have had to pay 2/6 in the shop for them. Of course I grant a margin for perishable articles of that kind, but I am going to make a charge, a serious charge, here, that certain dealers would prefer to let their fruit or fish rot, rather than sell them at cheap rates, which might bring down the price of those articles. Some time ago I was amazed to see, in the Castleknock district, a six-acre field of cabbage with sheep turned in on it. I made it my business to go to the man who owned these six acres of cabbage, and I said to him, "What, in the name of goodness, are your sheep in this field for?" He said: "They are there because it would not pay me to send in my horses and men to bring the cabbage to the Dublin Markets. I would not get enough for the cabbage to pay for the wages of my men and the feeding of my horses." And, accordingly, his sheep were turned into this field of beautiful cabbage. I want to say, in passing, that cabbage and green vegetables are most essential articles of food. Now, to come to another matter, for twenty years I lectured in foodstuffs to the Jubilee Nurses, and it was my object, in these lectures, to point out to the Nurses how they could provide or get the cheapest and most nourishing articles of food to represent the least cost. That is, they were to pay as little as possible for the articles that would be of nourishment to their patients. Again, I want to make it quite clear, that nobody objects to a reasonable profit coming to a distributor or retailer, but in many cases there is no question about it that the amount of profit claimed is far too great. The manager of a respectable grocery firm, here told me that his general turnover was twelve per cent., and that occasionally it might amount to fifteen per cent. I do not think anybody here would object to a turnover of twelve or fifteen per cent. on a grocery business. I trust the Ministers will see their way to accept this resolution and appoint a Committee, because I think nothing but good can come out of it. I would have alluded to certain other things, but as Deputy Johnson has referred to those points himself, I thought it was unnecessary for me again to refer to them.
Mr. WM. A. DAVIN
If the statements, or the evidence, rather, of profiteering that have been put forward by Deputies who have already spoken, particularly Deputies Gorey and Sir James Craig, were to be taken as evidence by this Committee which I trust will be set up, then I think that the Committee, if appointed, this evening, could come to a conclusion before midnight. They would easily be able to place the responsibility for this scandalous profiteering upon the proper shoulders. I think the Deputies will agree that the average worker and middle class person of the cities and towns of this country, and particularly of Dublin, have had a considerable amount of patience in putting up with profiteering in this country for the last four or five years. If ever a revolution were justified against any section of the people I think it would be justified against those who are carrying on profiteering in the country at the present time. The President here this evening stated—and I agree with him, though I think it is unfortunate to have to do so—that human life in this country is very cheap. Personally, I would far rather see a human being shot than to see him die of starvation. It is a horrible thing to contemplate the condition of persons in the slums of Ireland, and particularly in those of Dublin, with its high rents, when they have to face the fact of having to find a sufficiency of the necessaries of life to keep body and soul together.
Mr. GOREY
What about the poor in your own constituency?
Mr. WM. DAVIN
It is the same as in your own area, I dare say. Deputy Gorey, I am sure, is more interested in the price of barley than perhaps any of us that are on those benches, but I think it is only quite right to draw his attention, and the attention of the Members of the Dáil, to the fact that the price of barley three years ago was fifty shillings per barrel. To-day, as soon as it may be fixed, the price perhaps will be 20s. per barrel. I suppose it will be fixed. Notwithstanding the fact that there has been such a reduction from fifty to an average of twenty shillings, still the cost of working that particular commodity is the same as it was three years ago. I can quite see it does not affect Deputy Gorey personally, as he, apparently, is the representative of "Pussyfoot" Johnson in this Dáil. I know myself in the country at the present time the small farmer or poor person who has eggs or butter or such other produce to sell in a local town can only get in the case of eggs 1s. 6d. per dozen; but come up to Dublin and you find that the consumer in Dublin at present is paying both for himself and his family, in the case of eggs, I understand, 3s. per dozen, or in or about that figure. I know very well the experience I have had going about different towns in England, and I quite agree with Deputy Figgis that it is possible and in all cases you will find that produce such as eggs and butter and such as that produced in this country can be bought cheaper by the Irishman in England than they can be bought by the Irishman in Dublin or Cork or any of those towns. I think the Dáil will agree that if this is the case, the time has arrived when some Government must put a stop to it. I know myself it may be said that the cause is preferential through rates. I know cases in the railways where in the case of eggs and butter and things of that kind the railway companies give preferential through rates so that the Irish products can be exported to England and thus enable Irish people to feed the hungry English people at the expense of the Irishman. Now a lot has been said in the Dáil this evening with regard to the high cost of living to-day, being due largely to the high cost of labour. If Members of the Dáil will carry their minds back to the beginning of the War in 1914, and to the years 1915 and 1916, they will find that before the workers got any rise in wages, prices had soared up at that time so that in that particular period the high cost of commodities had no relation to the high cost of labour, at that particular time at any rate. Now I have seen the Mountjoy Menu Card posted up in the city, I suppose at the expense of the Government. But if the Mountjoy Menu Card is a correct interpretation of what prisoners are getting in Mountjoy, I say that at least the worker in this country should have the same consideration, assuming he is prepared to do an honest day's work for an honest day's pay. But if I can reason out that Menu Card rightly, I say that the average worker in the towns at the present time cannot get the equivalent in his own house of what the Mountjoy Menu Card gives the prisoners. I believe that if this Committee is set up, and if it gives a decision upon evidence such as we have heard here in the Dáil this evening, its findings will go a long way to solve the industrial troubles that we have been suffering from in this country for the past two or three years. Deputy Sir James Craig referred to the question of milk, and in dealing with the case of milk at the present time, he dealt particularly with the cost from the point of view of the dairyman who has a certain number of cows. Now, we all know that in the city of Dublin there are a certain number of dairymen who have no cows at all. In cases of that kind they get milk up from the country at the rate of 1s. 2d. per gallon, to which is to be added 1d. per gallon to cover railway charges. And this milk, as we see, is sold to the consumer at 8d. per quart. I think there is some mistake in that particular figure, as far as the charge to the consumer is concerned. Deputy Gorey has referred you to the fact, I hope it is not true, but I am told that something on the lines that have been said, is about to happen—that there is a surplus supply of barley in this country at present. Notwithstanding that, we find that Guinness is importing a lot of foreign barley and Indian corn. Now, I don't know whether the Irish people are prepared to allow foreign barley to come into this country and be manufactured into other products, while at the same time Guinness refuses to buy Irish corn.
Mr. GOREY
Foreign barley was coming in last year, it is not coming in this year. I do not want to be represented as saying that I said it was coming in this year.
Sir JAMES CRAIG
I think that statement is wrong. Guinness's people are not bringing in any foreign barley this year.
Mr. GOREY
They did bring it in last year, but not this year.
Mr. DAVIN
I accept your statement.
Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS
I think they decided not to do so on account of the representation made last year from the barley growers.
Mr. DAVIN
There is another question that we have got to face, and it is a fact that before we live, or try to live, or buy the necessaries of life, we have to get a good house in which to live and at a fair rent. The cost of housing, particularly in towns and cities, and in Dublin, should be taken into consideration by that Committee.
Mr. GOREY
And so should the number of bricks laid by the bricklayers.
Mr. DAVIN
It may be out of place just now to refer to the price charged by Undertakers carrying out funerals to day. But it appears to me that the cost of living is far higher than the cost of dying or getting a decent funeral at the present time. After what Mr. Gorey and Sir James Craig and others have said, I would appeal to the Government to allow this Committee to be set up and to get to work, and, if the Dáil will permit them, the Committee would deal with this matter as quickly as possible.
Mr. McGOLDRICK
Shilim go bhfuil a lán de'n gceart ins san abhar rún so, os comhár na Dála. It seems to me that the Resolution put before the Dáil by Deputy Figgis is one that should commend itself to the Government. I do not think there is anything that is more urgent than this question. We have on the one side the case made on the part of the producer of commodities that he is unable to obtain a price that will enable him to produce, and on the part of the consumer that he is not able to afford the price he has to pay. Between these two agencies—the producer on the one side and the consumer on the other—we have the middle-men. All these grievances of which we have heard are to my mind attributable to the middle-men. I think both these parties have grievances, and I think they are about equal on each side. The real party to blame is the intermediary or middle-man and undoubtedly the circumstances that prevail and that prevailed during the recent big war have enabled the middle-men to take advantage both of the consumer and of the producer. That is largely the cause of the trouble we have at the present time. Now I think the argument is worthy of being advanced that there are too many middle-men. The number of people operating between the consumer and producer is far too large in proportion to the need we have here in this country. And I think that when the terms of reference of this Committee are fixed there should be an Article put in to consider whether something cannot be done to mitigate the harm done by the middle-men and reduce as far as possible the number of middle-men; or at least make it impossible for the same number to operate so that it would not be possible for so large an amount of money to be lost between the producer and the consumer. The terms of reference set out here by the proposer are, first to set forth a list of commodities necessary to livelihood, second, to enquire into the prices available for such articles or commodities to the producer, third, to enquire into the prices paid for such articles by the consumer, fourth to report if there be any undue disproportion between these two scales of prices, and fifth, if so, to recommend measures to be taken to end that disproportion. Now that is the proposal he wishes to put before this Committee as far as I can see. Deputies here denounced certain commodities that are creating an extraordinary amount of unrest and an extraordinary amount of friction. These are not necessary to livelihood, I suppose, although with the working population they are almost indispensable. One cannot wonder at that, because the working classes have not many varieties of recreation to fall back upon, and if they fall back upon these, we must admit that they are entitled to some little amusement in a life which is largely made up of hardship and exertion. Anyone could admit this without admitting or approving for a moment of these things being used to excess. I am strongly against the abuse of any of these privileges, and I think at the present time they are fairly taxed for the use of such privileges. I do not think there is any reason why they should be so taxed, because I do not think that the cost of the production of these commodities could account for the charges made for them. Of course, this Government, as well as the British Government, naturally step in and take as much as they can, and of course it is the only material commodity on which they can get a huge revenue. But if the people understand that they are paying revenue, they are at least entitled to get the advantage of reasonable prices. They are the people who are doing the work of the nation, and they are entitled to see that a Committee, or somebody else who understands these things, should consider them. The people who have to pay taxes in this country are too heavily taxed, and some method should be found of giving them reasonable relief. This is not an immediate demand; it is a motion to inquire into the price paid for these commodities; and the Committee, if appointed, must take these things in hand and try to find for this country some sort of reasonable standard by which they can measure whether the intermediary is complying with the needs of the nation or not, or whether he is accepting only what he can collect and whether he is charging too much for the commodities which he sells. Deputy Johnson gave us figures with regard to other standards of life. He gave us the Army standard as 18/5 and the workers' standard 32/- per week, and the officers' rations at 15/9 per day. All these were based upon some accounts or estimates, and of course it depends upon the particular commodities that these particular individuals are regarded as entitled to indulge in. If these were standardised there would be nothing unusual in such figures. They would give us the idea of what could be done. Now, Deputy Gorey talks about the prices in pre-war days, in 1914, for raw material as being 100 per cent. higher to-day compared with that time.
Mr. GOREY
They are 100 per cent. up to-day compared with what they were in 1914.
Mr. McGOLDRICK
In regard to the manufactured article, not the raw material.
Mr. GOREY
The raw material is a great deal less than in 1914.
Mr. McGOLDRICK
Yes. It comes practically to this, that in every important material the prices are considerably up, and particularly in regard to foodstuffs. The price of barley cannot be so easily controlled and regulated. Barley must be grown upon speculation; the growing of barley is merely a gamble against the possibility of barley being required, and it is not required as a general article of consumption. Deputy Gorey talks about reduced output and about Guinness brews being reduced from 20 to 5 brews per week, while the profits are the same, and we hear that potatoes produced at from 7/- to 10/- per barrel fetched twice that price in the city. Sir James Craig spoke of the price of bread and milk, and that the people who sold them were sweeping in excessive profits. I take it that their turnover must be very small if they have to charge such prices or otherwise perhaps enable them to get very heavy profits, but this is because there are far too many of these middle-men in the business. The remedy is to eliminate, by making the game unprofitable, as many as possible out of the business, and also that a standard of profit must be fixed if we are to get through this difficulty at the present time.
Mr. R. WILSON
I listened to this discussion with much interest, and I would like to remove what I consider to be a false impression about profiteering in connection with milk supplies. I am a milk supplier, and I know that milk is not being retailed at 2/8 per gallon. Milk so retailed is the milk that comes from the country. If you go into the poorer districts you will get milk at 4d. per quart. At the present time it is 8d. per quart, or 2/8 per gallon, because prices have gone up. The supplier has 8d. on the gallon of milk. That is not an excessive profit because a man has to live and pay his men, and he has to pay his labour. As regards the milk Sir James Craig speaks of, that is milk delivered in suburban districts, where a man has to employ a horse and cart, and people cannot expect milk delivered in that way for less than 7d. or 8d. per quart. With regard to bread prices in the country they are based upon the prices in the city, and I have always contended that the prices in the city are due to the excessive prices paid to the bakers for making the bread. I wish to point out that in London and South Wales that the two-pound loaf is sold for a considerable period past for 4d. and if you inquire, you will find the reason is that the men in England are satisfied to work a 54-hour week for 70/-, while in Dublin the bakers must get 90/- for a 42-hour week. Bread costs a penny per loaf more to make in Dublin than in England, and the fact is you cannot have it both ways. You cannot have cheap bread and high wages. Then with regard to dear house rent, I have in my time got a considerable number of bricks laid, and I find now that you will have to pay 14/- to 16/- for the laying of 280 bricks, which is nearly ½d. per brick. You cannot have cheap houses if you have to pay at that rate for the laying of bricks. These things will be inside the scope of the Commission that you may appoint. It was made plain by a trades union, which is the bug-bear of the farmers, that the wages paid to the Dublin dockers exceeded the wages paid in any other part of this country. How can you have cheap living which is to be based upon such a standard of wages, and these are the men who when we thought to get proper prices for our bacon and our pigs refused to give us an opportunity to get proper prices for the bacon at a time when they were getting 16/- per day themselves. As regards the middle men, you cannot interfere with trade competition. Competition is the life of trade, and you must leave the middlemen as they are when very likely they will eliminate one another, but do not interfere with their trade. I am against forcing the farmers to till, and I am against forcing people to go to business. Any such course is the limitation of the liberty of the subject, and it could not be tolerated. With these remarks I may say I am quite satisfied to wait for any result that will come out of the appointment or institution of a Committee of this kind. I hope the Ministry will give their assent to its appointment, and I support the motion that this Committee should be set up.
Mr. MILROY
It seems to me that this motion, while being one dealing with a very vital question, is not sufficiently comprehensive. It merely deals with the cost of living. There are other things of very great importance besides the cost of living. For instance, the cost of dying is really a very expensive item, to the poor people who have to go to the undertaker, and I take it that it is a matter that deserves consideration. The average case probably among the poor people is when a death occurs the relatives have to make a collection to defray the cost of the funeral. In that respect I feel the title ought to be amended so as to read the "Cost of Living and Dying Committee." It is not a matter for jest at all. It is a very, very serious matter for the poor people who have to defray the heavy cost of the undertaker's charges. There is another matter that I have not heard any reference made to, though I have been here for the whole of the discussion; it is the cost of living in hotels, a very important matter for homeless people, like a good many members of this Assembly, when they come to Dublin. They have to resort to places like hotels, and they have to meet the cost of hotels. There is also the cost of dining in restaurants. I believe it is suggested that there has been a reduction in the cost of living in the past few years, but I have not found any reduction whatever in the charges of either hotels or restaurants for a very considerable time. In fact, I think they are rather on the increase than otherwise. These are things that a Committee of this Dáil ought to consider, because I am sure there is hardly a member of this Assembly but has had experience of what appears to be the exorbitant charges in both those establishment. There are, of course, many things that ought to be taken into consideration. I am sure there are many members of this Dáil who occasionally experience—I do not know whether they enjoy it—a ride in a taxi. That is a very expensive mode of locomotion, but sometimes a very necessary one. They ought to consider this matter, because it enters into-the cost of living, as any expenses that a man incurs certainly enter into what is the standard of living, as the standard of his life is not so much measured by what he receives as what his expenses are. There is another illustration, though I am sure it causes no anxiety to the mover of the resolution; that is the cost of shaving and hair-cutting.
Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS
I am out of that.
Mr. MILROY
Perhaps he is not interested in that, inasmuch as I understand he occasionally gets a free shave. I am saying this merely to indicate that the cost of living, and the investigation of it, is not merely the investigation into what are essential articles for maintaining existence, but what is the average outlay or expenditure for the average man or woman in a general way of life. If this Committee does investigate this, if it is going to arrive at a standard which is not what may be called a pauper standard, but the standard of real existence, it ought to take into consideration not merely the commodities that are essential to livelihood, but the various expenses that are common to the life of the average man or woman in the community.
As I explained on the last day, this matter was under the consideration of the Minister for Industry and Commerce. Before coming to that part I would like to deal with a couple of statements of some of the figures that have been mentioned. If I understood correctly, I think Deputy Johnson said that the pre-war cost of maintaining a pauper inmate in Belfast was 32/- per week.
Mr. JOHNSON
The present price of a ration allowed in the Dublin Workhouse for a family is £1 12s. 0d.
If I take it as correct, 15/9 a day was mentioned for an official of a workhouse.
Mr. JOHNSON
15/9 weekly is the price for an official's ration allowed in Belfast Workhouse. The ration allowed to an adult worked out at present-day prices at 15/9.
I am afraid I cannot get very much further on that. I took it our soldiers were costing up to 18/5 per day.
Mr. JOHNSON
Per week.
Very well, I will leave that so.
Mr. JOHNSON
You would want more than the £10,000,000.
I was thinking that there was one item mentioned by Deputy Davin which I have a very particular interest in, that is housing. I think it is right to say the Government will not be in a position to subsidise housing to anything like the extent to which it is subsidising it this year next year. The Revenue will not permit it, and when you take into consideration the sum allowed—£750—for a house, as against £200 pre-war, I think it will be realised there is some profiteering at any rate in that particular line of business. If a house which cost £200 pre-war now costs £750 I think it is fair to assume the rent might reasonably be expected to be 3½ times the amount. I think it is not that. This motion of Deputy Figgis does not, in the opinion of the Minister for Industry and Commerce, meet the situation. It deals with a comparison between food stuffs being produced in Ireland and saleable at a cheaper rate in England, and it then goes on to say having regard to the general fall, that that fall in prices to the producer has not been accompanied by a similar fall to the consumer. It then deals with the disproportions as being the cause of much discontent, and it moves that a Cost of Living Committee be appointed. It then sets out terms of reference. I do not think the terms of reference set out there can possibly meet the views that have been expressed here in the debate on this cost of living. The Minister for Industry and Commerce and I have discussed this matter, and it appears to him that this particular resolution was not sufficiently exhaustive to deal with the situation. I read a very long report from the Minister last week. Unfortunately, he is not well this week, and will not be in for a few days. I think he has not yet completed the terms of the motion he intends to bring before the Dáil, and, of course, if this particular motion be passed, there will be no necessity for it, as you will be cutting across the line. This is what he suggests:—
"Whereas in certain places and districts the retail prices of the commodities specified in the Official Report on the Cost of Living are substantially in excess of the average retail prices of the same commodities as determined in the said Official Report;
"And whereas in certain places and districts the increase in the retail prices of the said commodities as compared with the retail prices in July, 1914, is substantially in excess of the average increase for the same commodities as determined in the said Official Report;
"And whereas it is desirable, in the opinion of this Dáil, that the causes of such excess should be investigated;
"And whereas in certain places and districts the increase in the retail prices of beer, porter, stout, spirits, and other beverages, as compared with the retail prices of the same commodities in July, 1914, should, in the opinion of this Dáil, also be investigated:
"Now, this Dáil doth approve and determine that the Minister of Industry and Commerce may, in any place or district, appoint a Commission, to be known as a Commission on Prices, to enquire into and report as to the matters aforesaid, and in any case in which, in the opinion of a Commission, the current retail prices are unreasonable, to make such recommendations as the Commission may think fit.
"And this Dáil doth hereby order that all persons having any knowledge of the subject matter of any such inquiry shall, if so required by a Commission on Prices, furnish to the Commission such particulars as the Commission may determine to be relevant to the inquiry.
"Any reports made to the Minister of Industry and Commerce by a Commission on Prices shall be laid as soon as may be before this Dáil."
That is as far as he has got. I am not proposing that; it is a suggested motion he intended to bring before the Dáil. It may not perhaps exhaust the subject in the light of the debate, but at any rate I think it is clear that it does get more closely to what members have in their minds than the resolution, and that it perhaps deals with some instances that were mentioned. If my recollection is correct, Deputy Figgis on the last day explained that in some districts very much larger prices were paid in one street than in a corresponding street in the same area, and so on. As I explained, these terms of reference are not yet fully approved of by the Minister. The suggested Committee, I presume, would be a Committee of the Dáil, but it does not say so. It would be a Committee either of Civil Servants or half Civil Servants and half of the House, and so mixed up. At any rate, the machinery for dealing with this is at present in the Ministry of Industry and Commerce. It is obviously the place from which such inquiries should be made. I do not think the real purpose intended, then, by Deputy Figgis would be achieved if this particular resolution was passed, and if the Committee was restricted to the terms of reference here. If I recollect, Deputy Johnson went outside the terms of reference. I do not know whether he meant in going outside the terms of reference that he meant what he said to be included in the terms of reference. Certainly it has not been included, and it would not meet the object he has in mind. I would like Deputy McGoldrick to know that, as far as the revenue on the particular articles to which he referred is concerned, I have to warn him to keep his hands off. If he takes away that revenue from the Government there will be very little to fall back on, and we will not be able to carry on the ordinary administration. I would ask the Dáil to allow the motion to be withdrawn until the Minister for Commerce brings up his particular report or suspend it until then, and if his recommendation does not meet with approval, the motion of Mr. Darrell Figgis could be taken as an amendment.
Mr. T. JOHNSON
Might I suggest that the Minister might consult with the Deputy and perhaps one or two other members and perhaps we could have a sort of general agreement.
Certainly, if the Deputies who wish to consult him will let me know I will inform them when he will be back in his office. That will be within a couple of days.
Mr. JOHNSON
In that case I would support the suggestion that the motion be withdrawn for the time being.
Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS
I would like just briefly, without delaying the Dáil, to touch on one or two matters that had not come before the Dáil on the practical suggestion that has been made by the President. There has been, I think, practically for the first time since we met here more unanimity than usual, and it is very satisfactory to have contributed towards creating it. I want to touch upon the actual wording which was rather carefully thought out, and was thought out in reference not merely to inquiries at the present moment but inquiries that have preceded in which Deputy Johnson and myself were associated. I think it very necessary whatever is done in the future regarding the appointment of any committee that there should be a statement made as to what are the commodities necessary to livelihood. It is because I had not noticed that in the terms stated by the President that I do not think his motion in that respect would quite meet the case. I think there are certain other articles that are not absolutely necessary to livelihood that might be attached to the general list. These are small matters of detail, however. It is a very serious state of affairs that you have in Ireland at the present moment, a number of people sending to Manchester, Liverpool and London for Irish articles. With regard to the suggestion made by the President I urge him to consider this, and I will be very glad to give any assistance I can to the Minister of Trade on this matter. I do not think that local committees will meet the case. I agree they are necessary in addition to the central committee, but they will not meet the case because we have had in the past eighteen months or two years local profiteering committees that have been contributed to by the very people to whom a great deal of the trouble is very largely due. I do not say that they are actually profiteering, but I do say that if there is profiteering they are the persons against whom the offences are alleged and therefore you cannot have them on your jury as they are the people who might be ultimately found in the dock.
Mr. D. McCARTHY
There is no House.
On a count 17 members were found to be present.
Motion: "That the Dáil do now adjourn." Agreed.
The Dáil adjourned at 7.55 p.m.