I beg to move: "That a sum of £193,445 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1924, for the salaries and expenses of the Ministry of Industry and Commerce, including Umpire and Courts of Referees, contributions to the Unemployment Fund and to Special Insurance Acts, for advances to work people under the Labour Exchanges Act, 1909, Fees and Expenses of Medical Referees under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906, Fees to Certifying Surgeons under the Factory and Workshops Act, 1901, Fees and Expenses under the Trade Boards Acts, 1909 and 1918, Fees and Expenses under the Electricity Supply Act, 1909, and the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, and contributions towards the expenses of an Irish Stall at the "Daily Mirror" Fashion Fair. (A sum of £102,000 has been voted on account.)
COMMITTEE ON FINANCE. - ESTIMATES FOR PUBLIC SERVICES. MINISTRY OF INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE.
The Deputies have received the details of Sub-head A in type, I take it. How is it intended to proceed? Is it intended to have a statement from the Minister and take the general discussion first?
I think I promised the statement first.
at this stage took the Chair.
Deputies by now will have received the details of sub-head A. First I would refer to the work of the Ministry during the past few months. The Ministry of Industry and Commerce in its present form, amalgamating what were previously two separate Departments, came into existence in October, 1922. Since that time a large part of the attention of the Ministry was devoted to examining legislation which had been inherited from the British Government, and so far as possible adopting what was suitable to Irish needs. Laws relating to such matters as patents, trade marks, designs, merchandise, copyrights, companies, merchant shipping, trade facilities, safeguarding of industries and electricity supplies have been carefully analysed. We have had some adaptation Orders. For example, such an Order as the Adaptation of Enactments Act, 1923, dealing with light railways, and the External Companies Adaptation Order, 1923, and we have prepared and in draft a Control of Electricity Bill. The principles of new legislation on the subject of patents, trade marks and designs are under consideration, and are receiving legal attention. In addition the Dáil will recollect that we have enacted the Statutory Undertaking Continuance of Charges Act, 1923, and, as promised when that Act was before the Dáil, we have set up a Committee of Investigation regarding the Dublin United Tramways Company. We also passed through the Oireachtas a special Act dealing with unemployment insurance, and we are still engaged in investigating the system of unemployment insurance operating in various countries, both in the old and new worlds, to see what system more suitable than the present it is possible to bring into operation in this country. Inspectors are in training for the operations of the Weights and Measures Act, and an investigation is proceeding throughout the country to recover and restore the standard and sub-standards which have been lost during the past few years. The first annual report of the Companies Consolidation Act, as to Companies operating in the Saorstát. has been submitted to the Oireachtas. Inspectors have been appointed for the purpose of the Factories and Workshops' Act, and medical referees and certifying surgeons under the Workmen's Compensation Act.
It has been a large task to review and adapt to the new circumstances created by the establishment of the Saorstát all legislation on matters affecting industry and commerce inherited from the British Government. Much of that legislation is of little advantage to the Saorstát and even where it has been of advantage the machinery has not always been suitable. Where necessary, the administrative machinery has been made effective, while such early amendments in the code of industrial and commercial legislation to encourage the course of trade are being rapidly advanced. To promote trade we have for the first time in this country a new Statistical Department and a new Intelligence Department. The Intelligence Department collects reports from our trade representatives abroad, reports which should be of great service to the industrialists of this country. Simultaneously, details have been obtained from Irish manufacturing and trading concerns as to their capacity for export trade and their requirements in the matter of foreign markets. The effect of a number of commercial treaties and arrangements inherited from the old regime is being carefully examined with a view to safeguarding the real interests of the Saorstát, and the question of the maintenance or alteration of such treaties and arrangements can in future be decided. It will then be possible to see their defects and possibilities. Effective machinery for the registration of ships and seamen has been set up, and the service for the establishment of wreck salvage and life-saving around the coast is being overhauled.
Much damage has been done in recent years to the building and equipment of this service, and an inspection of all the old stations is now practically complete. On the East Coast 14 stations have been re-established and are being re-equipped. Practice and drills have been re-started, and the service will be in working order, it is hoped, within a few weeks. Similar action is proceeding in connection with the stations on the South and West, so that before winter comes arrangements will have been completed to deal with wrecks on any part of the coast of the Saorstát. During the past few months continuous attention has been given to the important matter of the future organisation of the railways to determine the best method of procuring a cheap and efficient system of transport for the Saorstát. The problem is a very complicated one, and its conditions are in many respects peculiar to the Saorstát. The damage to the railways and the general disturbance of trade caused exceptional difficulties which necessarily involved delay in examining the problem from every point of view so as to ensure that the policy ultimately adopted will prove beneficial.
Considerable progress has, however, been made, progress which has altogether surpassed our expectations at one time. I may state that two of the larger companies, with some of the smaller companies in the south, have now come to a provisional understanding, and that understanding really forms the nucleus of the whole scheme, details of which are under consideration at the present moment, and, in fact, a conference upon those details is taking place even this very day. The Ministry fully realises the necessity for the organisation of the whole railway system within the Saorstát. It has not felt that it would be justified in using compulsion up to the present to bring about agreement between the parties. In fact, so far the voluntary work of the various companies has been so successful that we feel justified in waiting a little longer for the ultimate voluntary successes from all the companies. It may be understood that the time which will be afforded for voluntary conclusions to be arrived at by the companies cannot be unlimited, and the Government will be bound in the interests of the whole Saorstát to take action if within a very reasonable time from this date the companies do not themselves come to conclusions of their own volition. We do hope that before long it will be possible to announce the main principles which it is intended to adopt. At the present moment as the conference in those matters is taking place, I do not think I should do more than state what I have stated.
Special attention has been given to the repair of damages to the railways, and arrangements were completed to enable companies to carry out repairs with special expedition. Generally speaking, those arrangements have worked most effectively. Where any difficulties have been experienced they have been overcome, and with few exceptions the damaged lines have now been restored, and even where repairs have been necessary on a large scale their early completion is assured. In speaking of the restoration of the railways and of the maintenance of the railways during the difficult times in the past few months I should like to bear very cordial testimony to the whole-hearted support which the Ministry received from the Railway Protection and Maintainance Corps of the National Army. No sooner did the Ministry bring under the notice of the corps any break in the traffic system of the country than it had the immediate attention of the very able Commander of that corps. I think the Dáil will realise that I only do justice in saying that the trade and industry of the country during the last year owe a good lot to the gallant effort of the Railway Protection Corps to keep the railway system running.
Since last October some twelve thousand persons have been placed in employment through the employment Exchanges, and in the same period more than one hundred industrial disputes have been settled, including disputes in the flour mills, certain ports and on the railways. Industrial Councils for the creameries and flour mills have been set up, and are functioning successfully. The administration of unemployment benefit for some 30,000 of unemployed has proceeded with smoothness and expedition. The inspection of factories and workshops has proceeded at a rate of 219 inspections each month. A number of applications to supply and generate electricity, particularly in country towns have been considered, and in most cases have been granted. Proposals for hydro development on the Liffey have been considered and arrangements are being made to assist parties concerned in their promotion.
A number of conferences have been held with harbour and dock authorities on matters ranging from proposals of a harbour for a trans-Atlantic traffic to applications to carry out structural repairs.
Deputy Milroy will be interested in knowing what we have done, and what we propose to continue to do, for the industry of the country, and I am sure the Dáil will share his interests. The Contracts Committee set up by the Government has been functioning for some months past. Our Ministry is not a purchasing department of the Government, but on the Contracts Committee we have two representatives, and the representatives of the Ministry in going to the Contracts Committee have been instructed to see that the interests of Irish industries are fully considered by that Committee, to see that they are fully safeguarded, and to make a case for Irish industries generally at that Committee. That their efforts have not been altogether unsuccessful the particulars which I gave the other day in replying to Deputy Milroy, and which, perhaps, I may repeat for the further information of the Dáil, amply justify. Returns were asked for by the Deputy for four months. I have those returns compiled. For the months of March the money value of all contracts placed by the contracts Committee within the Saorstát, and for goods of Saorstát origin was 85 per cent. of the total.
Would the Minister say the amount?
£131,825 10s. 3d., that is from the 1st to the 25th March. From the 25th March to the 31st May inclusive 94.6 per cent. of the money value of contracts placed by the Contracts Committee was placed within the Saorstát, the amount being £131,609 0s. 10d. For the month of June the total value of contracts placed within the Saorstát by the Contracts Committee was 99.36 per cent. of the total. The money value was £43,499 12s. 9d. It will thus be evident that the policy which I stated last February, the policy of the Government to encourage Irish industry by spending every possible penny economically within the Saorstát has been strictly pursued, and I should say even though the Chairman of the Contracts Committee has been good enough to assure me that I never approached the Contracts Committee except to kick it, we have on the Contracts Committee people who were more than anxious to co-operate and who felt it their duty to safeguard the interests of Irish industry.
The Intelligence Department which the Ministry has set up during the past twelve months has been collecting information as to possible markets abroad for our own products. We have been collecting from traders here at home statistics as to possibilities for their export trade, and at the present moment we have placed before the Minister for Finance proposals for the publication of a monthly journal which will supply traders with particulars of foreign markets to which they may successfully send their own products, and, perhaps, suggest to them, for their own consideration, methods or processes of manufacture that would make some of the industries in the Saorstát at the present moment more likely to meet successfully foreign competition. We hope to have the sanction of the Minister for Finance for that journal, and if we obtain sanction for it, then it should be possible to have it published at the very earliest date.
I have also referred to the Statistical Department that has been set up in the interest of Irish industries. A Fiscal Commission of Inquiry has been set up to inquire into the whole Fiscal question. Now, there is no more important subject bearing upon the welfare of the whole country than the Fiscal policy of the nation, and the Government could not possibly rush to a hasty or ill-informed decision upon a question of its Fiscal policy. Therefore, it has set up this Fiscal Inquiry to investigate the conditions of Ireland's industry, so that it may be enabled in the future to pursue an enlightened policy in fiscal matters.
We have got to realise that if our industries here are to be successful in meeting competition from abroad, they must be on a sound, economic basis; they must aim at that. Now, to be based on sound economics, they must have modern methods and modern methods must be employed; antiquated methods will not do. During the past six or seven years there has been a veritable revolution in industrial methods, and if our industries in Ireland are to compete successfully, with any possible shadow of success, with industries from across the Channel or from the Continent, they must be reorganised and they must bring their methods and processes up to date. Then, again, in order that these industries may be really economic, the management of them must be efficient. Without efficient management you will have blank failure. Now, if we have inefficiency of management and want of organisation in industry, or inadequate methods or processes, are we to saddle our people with those to make them pay for inefficiency? Such problems, then, as organisation in industry, processes of management, will naturally arise before the Government can feel justified in deciding on any fiscal policy with regard to these industries. The interest of the Government is a wider interest than the interest of any class. The interest of the Government is the interest of the whole of the citizens of the State, and it must not saddle the citizens of the State in paying for inefficiency or want of organisation or inadequate methods, and it will not do so.
The Commission on Reconstruction has been set up, and already a report has been received from that Commission dealing with roadway construction. That report has been published and has been sent to the Minister for Local Government, and we have been pressing the Minister for Finance to foot the bill which the Commission said would be necessary to carry out the work. The Commission is still sitting and taking further evidence, and we are awaiting its further reports.
May I just ask if, pursuant to a pledge given by the President when that matter was raised before, it is intended that the report should be distributed to Deputies?
If the President gave an undertaking to that effect, I shall certainly ask him about it, but I cannot say. The Canal Commission is now almost concluded, and we are awaiting the report from it at an early date. The Report of the Prices Commission has been considered in part, and is still under consideration, but it is hoped that before the end of the present week the report of that Commission will be made to the Ministry, and the Ministry will be urged to publish it at the earliest possible date.
In the interest of Irish industry, we have also succeeded in having the dues of Irish ships entering into English ports continued at the old rate, and not having our ships treated as foreign ships. The fact that we have been also pressing the Irish railway companies to come to the earliest possible conclusion of their deliberations in regard to amalgamation is also evidence that we are trying to secure for Irish industries the benefits of what we hope the reorganisation of the railways will mean in reduced rates for Irish traffic.
Now, the Estimates submitted for Trade and Commerce in the country are served by a Vote for £41,138, with part of the sum of £13,051, which is also devoted to the interest of trade. In the Estimates of the Ministry generally it would be very hard to draw a line between where the Labour interest ends and the Trade interest begins.
Deputy Milroy was interested to have the figures which we actually devoted to trade interests, and I have now given it to him. That leads me to the further reason for the amalgamation of the old Ministry of Economic Affairs with the Ministry of Labour. Before the amalgamation of these two Ministries, the public did not really know where to go with their cases; they did not know whether it was a case for the Ministry of Labour, or for the Ministry of Economic Affairs. Now, they know where to go, and if their case deals with Trade they go to the one Ministry. I hope it will be agreed that anyone who has come to us, whether from an industrial concern's management, or from the ranks of the industrial concern's employees, has found that he has had attention. There was overlapping in the old days, and the amalgamation has made for more rapid attention to matters. There has not to be a passing from one Ministry to another, or the return from one Ministry to another, of files of correspondence, but there has been more rapid attention and considerable economy, economy in staffs, in premises and, consequently, in rents, and we hope, also, economy in time, which is a very considerable matter. Nothing is more extravagant than to have a number of small departmental units water-tight where, if routine is to be followed out as it must be followed out, considerable delay will arise. Now, these considerations, considerations arising from experience in the old days when the Ministry of Economic Affairs and the Ministry of Labour did exist, led to the amalgamation of the two Ministries, and I think it will be found that generally their amalgamation has been productive of effective results.
I must compliment the Assistant-Minister for Industry and Commerce on the very exhaustive review he has given of his Department. At the same time, I cannot help feeling a little compassion for him because he reminds me of a piece of classic sculpture known as "The Laocoön," which represents three persons struggling with a serpent, and with very little prospect of being extricated. The Assistant-Minister for Industry and Commerce seems to be struggling in the coils of a system of Departmental procedure which was not his creation, but from which he does not feel able to extricate himself, at least, for the moment. However, I want to adduce a few reasons why he should be removed from that unhappy position in which not only he is being strangled, but, I think, the real vital economic interests of the country are being strangled. This Estimate is a most interesting one, but somewhat bewildering. The Minister a moment ago gave me some figures. He stated that in the Estimates submitted the interests of Trade and Commerce in the country were served by a Vote of £41,138, and that part of the sum of £13,051 was also devoted to the interests of Trade.
I have gone through the Estimates dealing with his Department, and I have endeavoured to extricate from the items given under the different heads the items which might be said to be devoted to Industry and Commerce, as distinct from Labour. They are not easily identified, with one or two exceptions. I suppose the item of £150 which is put down for the "Daily Mirror" Fashions Fair must be regarded as an unmistakable attempt to further the interests of Irish Trade and Commerce. Some of the other items are not easily identified either. The total Estimate for the three Departments is £327,803, and out of that I can only locate a sum of £27,000, which would seem to be devoted to Industry and Commerce in this country. Figures are given under the following heads:
Trade Department, £9,000; Stationery, £13,879; Statistics and Intelligence, £4,759.
Assuming that there is £41,000 which I have been unable to find figures for, out of £327,803, that seems to me to be a very small sum indeed to devote to a matter of such extraordinary importance as the Industry and Commerce of the country.
It was urged by the Minister in his concluding remarks that there was economy in many directions by the merging of the two Departments he mentioned. I hope it is not a mistaken kind of economy that is being pursued, and I hope it is not considered wise procedure to economise in the expenditure of money which is essential to the development of the industrial and commercial life of the country. I hope it is not considered wise and sound statesmanship to expend vast sums of money in trying to settle labour disputes and to be utterly and absolutely cheese-paring in the matter of trying to develop these things which will give healthy, social and economic stability to the nation, as well as satisfactory remunerative employment.
We were told when I raised this matter before, that it was not wise to confine the Ministry to the mere question of wages, hours of work and conditions of employment. I think that if we had a Department confining its attention exclusively to those things, and dealing with them efficiently and satisfactorily, it would be a great blessing. I am not at all certain that some responsibility for the fact that we have such regrettable widespread labour disputes cannot be apportioned to the circumstances which compel the head of this Department to have his attention distracted from these things by other matters. I think it would be for the good of the labour situation, and for the trade and commerce of the country if these two Departments were severed and some responsible man put at the head of each. It is a poor argument to say that because there is some economic link between labour and trade and commerce that, therefore, it is essential that they should be merged in one Ministry. It does not follow at all. No conclusive argument has been adduced to prove that. As a matter of fact, if that were so, I think another Ministry might, following on the same lines of logic, be merged in this Ministry, and that is the Ministry of Fisheries.
The Ministry of Fisheries has as much relation, in my opinion, to that of Trade and Commerce, if not more, than the Ministry of Labour has, yet no suggestion has been made that this third Department should be merged in this Ministry. As a matter of fact not only was a Department created, but a Ministry was created for the development of fisheries. I remember the Minister for Agriculture stating that when that was being urged that he was quite satisfied in his own mind that there was a real necessity for the institution of a Ministry of Fisheries. Just as he was fully satisfied of that, I am fully satisfied that the best interests of the Nation will be served by having separate Ministries for Labour and Trade and Commerce. I fail to see what real argument has been put forward to sustain this merging of the two Departments, both of which have distinct functions to discharge. The function of the Labour Department is to see after the hours, conditions and remuneration of labour, and the settlement or prevention of disputes.
I must remind the Deputy of the ten minutes' rule. He can make another speech latter on.
I did not know the rule applied to discussions on Estimates.
It does.
The Deputy mentioned a sum of £27,000. We have examined the Estimates very carefully, and I would call his attention to the details which have been supplied him. With regard to the sum of £41,138, on the first page he will find Trade Department. Then if he skips the Industrial Branch which I do not wish to press— some of that goes to trade—there is the Statistical Department, the Intelligence Branch, and further on, Transport and Marine. I should like to know how he computed the sum of £27,000.
Can I make another speech now?
We shall hear some other Deputies first.
No more important Estimates could come before the Dáil than the Estimates of this particular Department, and one feels it is necessary to congratulate the Assistant Minister on the care he has given to dealing with the various branches included in the Estimates. At the present moment particularly, it is necessary that every care, every attention, and all possible time and efficiency should be given to the work of this Department, especially as it includes so many sub-branches, each dealing in turn with critical phases of the National life. I repeat that every care and all attention should be given, and that there is no matter that could more fully absorb any one single person's attention than the work of this Department. Therefore, I draw attention to what is the most obvious factor in these Estimates. We have stated at the very outset of these additional details that have been provided—and I hope I may take the liberty to say that I think such additional details as these might with advantage be supplied by all Departments —certain increases that are possibly right increases. I take the first figure of these further details in Sub-section 3—the Minister and Secretariat. Last year this stood at a figure of £3,778. This year it has advanced to £5,263. In that sum is included the salary for the Minister. It is unfortunate under the circumstances that the Minister has not been seen in this Dáil for a good many months. I am aware that it can be said that he is taken up with other duties. If he is taken up with other duties, then he should be kept at those duties. All the time and attention of the Minister for Industry and Commerce, as long as he occupies that position, should be given to this Dáil. One has seen him very frequently in the precincts of the Dáil itself, but since the occasion on which he made a speech here, stating that certain debenture shares would not be paid, we have not seen the Minister in this Dáil, and yet his salary is figuring in these Estimates. I start by stating that that is not a satisfactory state of affairs. Further whoever is to act as Minister for Industry and Commerce should, during this period so vital to the future of the country, give it and this Dáil his entire attention. One recognises that the duties that usually would fall to him fall to the Assistant-Minister who has made his statement, and made it well. Those duties have fallen—if he will permit me to say it— into very excellent care. That does not alter the fact that there is a figure stated in these Estimates for which this Dáil has not seen value, and I urge that that is a matter that should receive attention, the more careful attention, because that Minister is a Minister also of the Executive Council.
Before passing from this I think I should just say straight away that at times in the life of every Nation there are matters even more vital than the Commerce and Industry of the Nation, and no man has done greater service to the Nation than the Minister to whom the Deputy refers. In the discharge of very vital services to the Nation he has been absent from this Dáil, and, I think, it is even beneath Deputy Darrell Figgis to refer to an absent Minister as he has referred to him.
I made no reference whatever to that fact, and I have stated already that he has been giving his time to other very important matters. I do urge what I have said, and I repeat and stand over every word I said, that if these duties are so important as to call for his whole time and attention, as no doubt they are, then the duties that attach to the position of Minister for Industry and Commerce should also receive another person's time and attention.
They receive my time and attention. These Estimates were drawn up and were in print before the Minister was called upon to discharge other duties.
I have not interrupted the Minister. I am entitled to state what I have to say, and to put what questions I have to put, and then the matter can receive attention. I have also added that the matter is under the Assistant-Minister's very excellent care. The Minister's salary figures in these Estimates, but what salary is being earned, and admirably earned, by the Assistant-Minister we have yet to find. No doubt it is presented somewhere, but I have not yet discovered it.
That is the trouble, I suppose.
That is so, there is no salary.
In any case the essential matter I am dealing with, and to which Deputy Milroy addressed himself, is the question whether Trade and Commerce should be separate, or whether they should be in one Ministry. My own personal opinion is, that they should be as they are, but I do state, whoever is in charge, and whoever is appointed, should be kept to the charge at this moment. If it be necessary for any person to be taken to other more important State duties, then some other person should be found to undertake the duties that belong to this Ministry.
On this Estimate I think the opportunity should be taken advantage of by the Minister to make some statement with regard to the various trade disputes that are holding up the economic life of the country. It is assumed that they have all received very careful attention from the Department. There is at the present moment a very serious dock strike that is holding up the entire economic life of the country. I think the opportunity should be taken under the head of this Estimate to give some information to the Dáil, and through the Dáil to the country as to exactly what progress has been made towards bringing that dispute to an end, or at least to put the salient features of the dispute before the Dáil, and through it before the country, in a way that they have not yet been presented in the public Press. This is a matter that involves a good many other subjects also. A statement was made in the Press the other day that there was a limited amount of certain vital foodstuffs in the city of Dublin. We would like to know exactly what attention the Department is giving to this question as to the position of various commodities of which the nation stands in need, owing to the hold-up of these ports. I am sure such information is being dealt with by one or other of the various branches of this Department. I urge that the information so collected, and receiving the attention of the Department should be put before the Dáil.
There is one other item on which I desire to ask for further information than the Minister has given. I am dealing with the last page of the supplementary information, that dealing with the office of Consulting Engineer to the Government. I have last year's Estimate in my hand. I ask then what exactly was the position, and who was the Consulting Engineer to the Government; whether he was a person or a firm; what is the remuneration; what are the various stipulations attaching to the discharge of the duty; whether he has anything to do with contracts or not; whether he receives fees or a salary. In the supplementary Estimate for last year that came before us this year, the opening words of paragraph 1 after reciting a number of matters, in respect of which a supplementary Estimate was necessary says: "And the fees and expenses of Consulting Engineer to the Government." These words clearly define that there are certain fees and expenses paid to the Consulting Engineer. In the supplementary information the position of his office is dealt with, including an assistant and secretary, and shorthand typist, but he himself is not mentioned. Therefore, I ask if information could be given as to who he is, the terms of his appointment and the method and manner of his remuneration?
I regret exceedingly that the Minister seems to have no policy regarding the encouragement of shipping and shipowning in the Free State. Railways, whether owned by a company or by the State, receive their money from the people of that country, and they return the money in the shape of wages and dividends to the people from whom they receive it. The process is quite different in regard to shipping and ship owners. Ship owners carry goods for freight. The goods they carry to the Free State are the goods of outsiders. A certain amount is earned on the carriage of these goods. The profits of these freights if carried by ships of the Free State come to the Free State, and are known as invisible imports. The Ministry is engaged in the encouragement of industries within the Free State, but if the bulk of these industries is carried by foreign bottoms a considerable amount of the profit goes to the foreigner.
Railways and roads derive their importance as a means of inter-communication between the people of a country, but their chief importance is as feeders of the ports which are served by the ships. The aim of all seaboard countries is supremacy in the carriage of goods at sea. One of the foremost countries in the world is spending millions at present trying to get a show on the sea. England derives her might and her pride and her power from the enterprise and the resource of her shipowners and her sailors. Why cannot we make some kind of a bid for some of this sea-borne traffic? Norway, one of the poorest countries in Europe, practically keeps itself on invisible imports. I am very pleased indeed to hear that the Department is to issue a Trade Journal.
Do not be too sure.
It will be of very great benefit to the manufacturers and traders within the country. While I must congratulate the Minister upon the exhaustive statement he has made to-day, it is my hope that when he next addresses the Dáil on the activities of his Department he will be in a position to outline some policy having for its object the encouragement of ship-owning within the Free State.
To resume now where I left off, what I mainly wanted to say was in reply to a question which the Minister asked me when I sat down. He alluded to certain figures which I quoted, and wanted to know how I got the figure of £27,000. It is probably due to the fact that there are no what I might call identification discs on these figures, or I may have miscalculated them, but the only estimate of figures that I could conclude were for trade purposes were those of Trade Department, Statistical Department and Intelligence Department. He has alleged, I am sure in all sincerity, that Marine Service is also for the Trade Department. I examined the figures, and unless I am suffering from a delusion that this item D, "Services in connection with wrecks and salvage," is trying to salvage the wrecks of our industrial life, I cannot see any other connection, but even if that is the purpose, £550 is a very small item to vote for it. The item "Coast Watching Service, £8,000," is one which, I think, would do with a little illumination. What service does that exactly cover, and what number of people are employed to absorb £8,000? These are small details. The point I want to know is how this particular Estimate can be construed as an expenditure in aid of Trade and Commerce. I wait with some hope of further information on that point from the Minister. I do not know if the Transport Department is also assumed to have any bearing on that, but there are no items unless it be the payment for the acquisition of land for railways. That is the only item that seems to me to indicate any bearing upon actual trade or commerce interests. In that Estimate 55, I find it very hard to locate an item of any serious amount which can be so regarded. "Contribution towards the expenses of the `Daily Mirror' Fashion Fair, £150"; that is probably all right for that purpose. "Dublin-Cork Steamer, £1,000:" I do not know whether that is an item that could be regarded as I have mentioned. I would like to be informed if it is so. But take all the other figures, they are figures which deal with the administration, so far as I can see, of the Labour Department. Now, I think there is a total lack of proportion in these matters if what I say is correct, and I make these criticisms, not in any acrimonious spirit, but with the desire to get further information, and if what I say is correct, even if the figures of the Minister are correct——
Which they are.
Then if there is £41,000, out of £327,000 spent in the matter of industry and commerce, I say that it is quite an inadequate proportion of the whole expenditure. The other must only be assumed to go towards the administration of the Labour Department and if the argument I made at the beginning is correct, that the Labour Department, in its ramifications, is swamping that section of the Ministry which should look after industry and commerce, it is time that industry and commerce should be placed in a position to look after itself, so that it would not be left to the tender mercies of a Minister who has a sort of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde existence. We are told that a Fiscal Committee has been appointed. There has been, as I said, a Ministry of Professors. We were told that Nero fiddled while Rome burned. Well, I am afraid that the Professors will be theorising while Ireland's economic life is simply ebbing away. I take a very strong and very emphatic stand upon this matter. This Department is the one on which Ireland's future economic life depends, and it is whether or not this Department, with regard to industry and commerce, takes the bold, courageous, broad and enterprising view that the future economic life of Ireland will be virile or feeble. If it is feeble it means that the whole structure and the whole stability of this nation will be feeble, and that eventually our political liberty that we have regained will be a poor safeguard for the welfare and the prosperity of the nation. I think I have nearly exceeded my second ten minutes. If I think of anything else I will reserve it for my third ten minutes.
I do not agree with Deputy Milroy that either the Minister or the Assistant Minister should be likened to Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, or either of them. I thought perhaps that An Leas-Cheann Comhairle would have called the Deputy to order for suggesting such a thing. The point that Deputy Milroy has made most of, I think, is his objection to the incorporation of the Department of Labour with this Ministry. When the proposal was made a year ago to merge the Ministry of Labour into the Ministry of Industry and Commerce it was assented to from these benches and I think we were right in so assenting. There is something to be said for Deputy Milroy's point of view if you are to consider labour as something that you can departmentalise in that absolute sense, and that it ought to be something distinct from any other section of the community. When you are dealing with a Labour Department you are dealing with men and women just as though you were dealing with a capitalist department.
You are not dealing with a thing which represents capital, but with men and women who own capital, and it is because of the theoretical ground, which is strong, that we object to the implied indignity that is embodied in the thought that you must have a special Department to deal with labour, as though it was something that must be separated from the rest of the community, and treated as an item in the social organism, but a subordinate item which ought to be treated differently from any other section of the community. It is a question of status on that side, and on that alone, I believe that it is much to be desired that the Minister who is responsible for Industry and Commerce should be responsible for matters arising out of industry and commerce, which incidently, occasionally means disputes between one section of the community and another, commonly referred to as capital and labour. But you do not desire to set up a special department called the Capitalist Department. Some people will say that the whole Ministry in most countries represents that, but nobody claims that there should be a capital department or a Ministry of Capital. We, at the same time, and for the same reason, object to a Ministry of Labour, and would much prefer that the concerns of the workman should be considered as part of the concerns of industry and commerce. I think that, perhaps, in this initial portion of the discussion on this vote, it is well to have cleared up the question that was raised by Deputy Figgis. Deputy Figgis asked where in this Vote was the salary of the Assistant-Minister, but I think Deputy Figgis is, perhaps, lacking in knowledge in this matter, because the Dáil knows no Assistant-Minister. There is no Assistant-Minister so far as the Dáil is aware, and certainly there is no salary attached to the member of the Dáil who is speaking on behalf of the Ministry.
Hear, hear.
We had a return in respect of members of the Oireachtas who are receiving salaries out of public funds, other than as members of the Oireachtas, or Ministers, and there is no sum opposite the name of Deputy Whelehan. His name does not appear on the list, so that we are quite justified in assuming that the services of Deputy Whelehan are costing the State nothing. I protest against that. I do not think that it is right that we should accept from Deputy Whelehan the services that he is performing without payment of a salary, unless it is quite openly and clearly stated that this is a voluntary service. Many men in the Dáil, and in the Ministry, have given tons and tons of voluntary services, calling for the same amount of attention even as their present duties. They have been done voluntarily, but that is not the kind of thing that can continue permanently, and certainly not in the case of men who have responsibilities of this kind. It is not right that the Dáil should expect to have answering to it for this Ministry a Deputy who has to do responsible work without any remuneration for that work.
Hear, hear.
The case that was made by the Deputy in explaining these Estimates was very interesting, but really not very illuminating. Deputy Milroy has, I think, complained, and also Deputy McBride, that there has not been any outline of policy, except in regard to one or two items. There has been a report from the Deputy regarding activities of the Department, but we have had no outline of future policy from the Department. We were told, for instance, that there was a legal examination proceeding as to the position in respect of trade marks, designs, and trade facilities. That, no doubt, is very much to be desired and very necessary, but it would have been more interesting and illuminating if we had been able to ascertain the mind of the Ministry in regard to trade marks and the protection of trade marks, and the part they are to play and that they occupy at present. What is the protection that is afforded to trade marks and patentees? I have heard, on what authority I know not, that a clever and ingenious person might be able to do extremely well if he took advantage of the legal position in regard to patents. It would have been interesting to hear from the Minister whether the intention is to continue the English law in regard to patents and trade marks, and also in regard to trade facilities, whether there is to be an adaptation or utilisation of the Trade Facilities Act to any extent; whether anything has been done under that Act, and whether the Ministry has made up its mind to give special facilities such as have been given, and are being given by the British Government, and I think by the North of Ireland Government, on this question.
We were not given very much information about the policy of the Department regarding railways. We learned that it is not the intention to interfere with the companies if they were able to come to an arrangement amongst themselves. I am sure they can come to an arrangement amongst themselves, but is the kind of arrangement they will come to amongst themselves the kind of arrangement that will be approved by the Ministry? Has the Ministry indicated to the railway companies the kind of an arrangement which they will approve of? If so, can we have any information from the Ministry as to what limitations have been put before the railway companies, and of what kind of policy will they approve? I suppose there will be need to come to the Dáil for powers, but it is not fair to the railway companies to allow them to proceed making agreements without having indicated at least some of the lines on which such agreements may be made, and will be acceptable to the Ministry. If the companies have, as a matter of fact, been given some guidance on that matter, is the Dáil not entitled to some information? Can we not hear from the Ministry what is the intention regarding railway amalgamation? Is it intended to allow several railways, but not all the railways, to amalgamate? Is it intended to allow some of them to amalgamate into one group, and some to amalgamate into another group?
I understood from a ruling of the Ceann Comhairle that this matter was to arise on Vote No. 56, dealing with the Transport Department. Does it strictly arise on this Vote? I would like to know whether the question of the Railway Agreement is to arise on Vote No. 55, dealing with the Ministry of Industry and Commerce, or on Vote 56, dealing with the Transport Department. If it is to be dealt with now, the Dáil should know.
I think it was agreed that the matter would range over several Estimates.
This matter was referred to in the Minister's statement, and the Deputy is quite within his right in dealing with it. I would remind the Deputy, however, that his time limit has expired. I will be glad to call on him again.
I notice that as against no expenditure last year, there is a provision in this year's Estimate for an expenditure of £13,879 for the work of the Statistical Department. I would like to know when that Department was set up. Was it set up on the 1st of April of this year? I presume that that Department is working on the returns furnished through the information supplied in the forms which come through the Customs Department and the Railway and Shipping Companies. If the information that I have had access to, or some of which I have seen, is the information that this Government Department is going to rely on with regard to statistics of trade in and out of the country, then I think that information will be very unreliable. The onus, according to law, is upon the exporter, or the importer in the other direction, and upon the forwarding company, to supply the information asked for in these forms. I have seen in thousands of these forms where the correct information is not supplied. In the case of export traffic, when the returns arrive at the port of shipment, according to the existing regulations and instructions, the traffic should be held up for that particular reason. I wish to draw the attention of the Minister to this aspect of the case, so that he may deal with it and see that the exporter who is supposed to fill in that form will give all the information necessary and so avoid calling upon a third party to get the information required. I suggest that some propaganda work is necessary in regard to the education of the exporters, pointing out to them the necessity of supplying accurate information and all the particulars asked for which, according to law, they are compelled to supply. There seems to be absolute ignorance on the part of exporters as to the necessity for supplying this information. It is unfair that a third party, on whom there is no obligation except to hold up the traffic at the port when the information is not supplied, should be asked to intervene. Picture traffic being held up simply because people in some interior part of the country do not supply the information that they should supply! Imagine the confusion at the port and the loss to the exporter! Some educational or propaganda work should be done in regard to stressing the necessity for the supplying of this information. The Minister has made a qualified statement with regard to the present position of the railways.
With permission, I will intervene, as the railways are being discussed now, to say that to-day the President had a meeting with Sir James Craig in London, and the railway question was discussed thereat. Another meeting is to be arranged to continue the discussion. It is only fair that Deputies should know that, as the railway question is now being discussed.
I am very glad to hear that, because I have always felt a solution of the railway question in this country would be the solution to the other and bigger question which we are all looking forward to. I was only going to refer to the railway question in so far as it concerns the failure of the Companies to agree. I presume they have failed to agree to a system of grouping, or to meet the wishes of the Government in whatever policy they lay down in this matter. On the 3rd of January last a very long and carefully prepared statement was made by the present Minister, and he indicated that they had given the Companies what, in their opinion, appeared to be a reasonable time—three months—to agree to a scheme of grouping. He further stated that failing agreement on the part of the Companies at the end of a further three months— on the 1st of July—the Government would be compelled to put into operation the policy which it indicated at that time. That was an additional three months, and even up to the present there is no agreement, I understand, between the Companies. I am quite certain, from the knowledge that I have at my disposal, that if the Railway Companies were called together to agree to a reduction of railwaymen's wages, the same time would not have elapsed in coming to an agreement; they would not have taken up the same time in coming to an unanimous decision on that matter. In this case apparently they have failed to agree, simply because they could not agree on a price for their shares, or agree as to how the higher class positions, created in the future reorganisation of the railways, would be allocated. Presumably they failed also in regard to what Directors would be in control of the railways in the Saorstát.
I will say this much, that we have been very considerate on this side of the Dáil to the Government in giving them every opportunity to do their best to bring about a solution of this very important question. I think sufficient time has already been taken up by the companies to bring about an agreement, if there was any desire for agreement. I think that a time limit should be named, and a definite statement should be made by the Minister for compelling agreement by that time. Then the Government should take their courage in their hands and put their own policy into operation. While all these parleyings have been going on, the railway rates have been working against the interests of the trade of this country, and that is a very important consideration. With regard to the development of trade and exports, personally I believe that under a unified system of railways, many things can be done which would enable the new railway system to give many concessions in that respect, and particularly to help the agricultural industry, and the development of agriculture generally. I could cite cases of articles such as potatoes or barley, or other agricultural produce, for which the railway rates for, say, 100 miles, for carrying goods in this country have been more than the actual price of the bag of potatoes or the barley. I think that is a position which cannot be allowed to go on, if there is any desire on the part of the Government to assist and develop agriculture. The Minister, according to the language he used, hopes that there will be ultimate success in the direction of an agreement between the companies themselves. I think he might make provision for their failure to agree, and to say at what time the limit should expire, and what he will be prepared to do in case of such a failure. He also stated that in the very near future he will be prepared, on behalf of the Government, to announce the main features of the scheme that has been agreed to between the two big companies, and under which many of the smaller companies will be prepared to come in. I think it is very desirable before any legislation is introduced in this Dáil that an opportunity should be given to the Deputies to hear the particulars of such a scheme, and an opportunity also for a full and free discussion of the principles involved in such a scheme as he may outline. The Minister also said that a conference is going on with regard to the details. Now, I am sure the Minister will agree that the details of any such scheme that concerns the future of men who have given very long and faithful service in such public service, are very important as they concern the future of men such as the men who might be affected by the new scheme. I think that aspect of the case should have at least the consideration of people speaking on behalf of the railway employees, and I trust that aspect of the case will not be lost sight of when it comes to be dealt with.
The question of damage has also been referred to by the Minister. I would again impress upon him, and upon whatever other Minister is concerned in the damage to overhead bridges, to consider this matter. There seems to be a dispute between the Government and the Co. Councils on the one hand, and the Co. Councils and the railway companies on the other hand. As this dispute has been going on, no attempt has been made to repair the overhead bridges destroyed during the recent commotion in the country. I trust that the Minister will look after that aspect of the case, realising that the overhead bridges are bridges on very important roads in the country, and that whatever dispute there may be between the parties referred to, the necessities of the situation demand that the bridges should be repaired, and repaired as soon as possible. I trust that whenever any scheme is being agreed to in regard to the repairs that the strengthening of the bridges will be taken into consideration, so that they may meet the demands of increasing road traffic. There is no doubt about it that the Ministry is to be congratulated upon its work in setting many industrial disputes that threatened the life of the country during the past year. I think there is general agreement upon their very good work in that respect.
I should like to say one word in congratulation to the Minister for the excellent statement he has made. At all events he has shown us that the Ministry has taken a very serious view of the task before them. They have set up important commissions to approach the question from many points of view. They have set up Commissions of Reconstruction. They have set up the Canal Commission, the Food Prices Commission, and the Fiscal Commission. Now, it has been admitted on all sides in this Dáil that of all these Commissions the Fiscal Commission is the most important. It will have a greater bearing on the future of this country, and of its trade, than all the others. The Government has been congratulated on the able men it has succeeded in appointing and getting to act on this Commission— political economists of a high standard. They are at present considering, from the point of view of the nation as a whole, what will be the wisest Fiscal policy for this new nation that is now taking its trade into its own hands. The Minister has been blamed for not outlining the policy for his Department. But I think the Dáil will congratulate the Minister and the Government upon waiting to read the Report of the Fiscal Commission before deciding on that very important matter as to what attitude Ireland would take in regard to its overseas trade. Those who have criticised the Ministry on the question of the Railways have approached it from many points of view. Deputy Davin has frankly admitted that the Ministry has been very active in regard to disputes, and has settled numerous disputes. The Ministry has been called upon to state what is its policy with regard to railway amalgamation. The very brief announcement that the Minister made that our President is at this moment in a very important conference upon the railway question, shows that the Ministry is losing no time about this railway matter and is following it up in the closest possible way. No compulsion has yet been attempted, and it will be a matter of satisfaction if such an important question as the amalgamation of the railway lines can be settled without resorting to compulsion. On the question of policy with regard to railways, there is no complaint against the Ministry, seeing at the very moment our President is engaged in a Conference. Until that Conference is decided how could any policy be decided? We can rest assured that the interests of the country will be safely looked after with regard to that Conference. I think the Dáil should be well satisfied with the extremely careful and businesslike statement made by the Minister outlining the policy of what has been done by the Ministry so far. On the most important point of all, that is our fiscal policy, no decision can be arrived at until we have the report of the Fiscal Commission.
I wish to say that the policy outlined by the Ministry was vague and unsatisfying. In addition to the rather perfunctory reference to trade marks, designs, and trade facilities and to the reference he has made regarding the railways, he touched upon the Contracts Committee. He stated the Ministry for Industry and Commerce was not a buying department, but that it was represented by two persons upon the Organisation Committee, and he gave certain figures as to the proportions of purchases by that Committee since the 1st of March, showing the high proportion of contracts within the Saorstát for goods purchased within the Saorstát. I have no doubt there has been a considerable improvement in that respect, but a very essential figure is required before we can come to a final judgment, and that is out of the £300,000 referred to of contracts placed since the 1st of March what proportion of the £300,000 was that to the total amount of State purchases within that time? In other words, do all the departments purchase all their material through these Contracts Departments? If not, then we are not getting the information that is required to satisfy the general demand of the country to know what the Government is doing regarding the purchase of Irish materials. If it can be said that this £300,000 represents the whole or nearly the whole of the purchase of all the State Departments, then it is a very satisfactory statement indeed. Perhaps the Ministry can tell us whether there are any Departments of the State which are not making their purchases through this Contracts Committee, and if so, can he state what the policy of those other Departments in regard to purchases outside the Saorstát may be, and in that case give us similar figures for those other Departments as he has given respecting the purchase by the Contracts Committee, relating to the proportion of the total amount of purchases which the contracts, placed within the Saorstát, comprise? Until we get those figures we are not very much nearer satisfaction because it may be that very much more than £300,000 worth of goods have been purchased, and a large proportion of that additional sum may have been sent out of the Saorstát. I hope the Minister will be able to satisfy us on that point.
The Minister has told us that one of their activities has been the setting up of a fiscal inquiry. I thought the credit for that was claimed by the Minister for Finance, but that by the way. There has also been set up a Commission on Reconstruction. There was also set up a Commission on Railways. I hope those Deputies who are looking to the Fiscal Commission with satisfaction will have better reason for that satisfaction than those who trusted to the promises of Ministers when they set up the other Commissions. Deputy McBride expressed satisfaction, joy almost, at the statement of the Minister in charge that a monthly journal was to be issued, but Deputy McBride misunderstood Deputy Whelehan. He did not say a monthly journal was to be issued; he said they had recommended a monthly journal to be issued, which was quite a different thing. I would imagine that it would be almost a matter of course that a Minister of Industry and Commerce would have issued a monthly journal, perhaps a weekly one long ago, but they have merely recommended that such a journal should be issued and published.
We have submitted.
I understand. Not only have they made recommendations but the Department has submitted proposals. I wonder whether we shall have the spectacle again of one Ministry or one section of the Ministry submitting proposals and another section turning them down. I am hoping they will have had more success in their submissions with the Ministry of Finance than other Departments have had with theirs, and I hope we shall see within a very few weeks the first issue of the Department's journal respecting Industry and Commerce but I have my doubts. The Commission of Reconstruction was appointed in the early part of the year, and it was very definitely promised by the Minister that this was no means to be a shelving Commission and we were told that when that Commission was set up it was to pay special attention to the question of unemployment. Very close inquiry was made into the question of reconstruction so far as it related to roads, and a report has been submitted and has been printed dated the 31st May. It has been in hands for some weeks now, has been considered by the Ministry of Local Government, and has been submitted to the Minister for Finance. I want just to draw attention to the fact again that this report has been printed for 6 weeks, and is available for official use. It has not yet been circulated to members of the Dáil. That Commission has given careful consideration to this question. The Committee contemplates certain work which may be done this year and for which plans are in being and for which machinery is ready. Every County Surveyor is able to begin the work of re-conditioning and reconstructing the roads at any time. I would like to have from the Minister responsible for this Vote, which was responsible for the setting up of this Commission, some kind of assurance that the Commission's work is going to bear fruit immediately; that when they told us we were to devote our time and attention to proposals which would give employment at an early date to a large number of men, they meant what they said. These proposals are reasonable and have been worked out in practical fashion. You could set to work within a week ten thousand men.
I want to know is the Ministry going to honour the promise of its Minister, and whether it is going to make effective the report of the Commission which it set up on a definite understanding and on a definite promise? I am, perhaps, asking Deputy Whelehan to accept responsibility which he will be loathe to accept, but he is in charge of this Ministry, which was set up under the Minister for whom he is speaking. I claim it is due to the Commission, and more especially due to the the country, to know whether the Ministry is going to give effect to this, the first of the reports that have been issued by that Ministry of Reconstruction, or are we to assume that the Minister's intention is not to be fulfilled, and that, having set up the Commission, the fulfilment of the recommendations may await further consideration. I am stressing this matter because it will affect the work of the Commission in future. It is a matter of urgency. The proposals are practicable and have been carefully thought out with expert advice. Money will be required, but it will be required in any case, and it is a question whether money is to be spent now or in a few months' time. I assume that the Minister, at any rate, before the Vote is finally passed, will be able, perhaps after consultation with other Ministers, to give the Dáil a positive assurance that the work outlined in the report respecting the re-conditioning and reconstructing of roads will be set going without delay, and that the utmost number of men that can be employed on this work will be set to work in the shortest possible time.
at this stage took the Chair.
The Minister has referred to the anxiety with which he was looking forward to the production of the report of the Canal Commission. I am not going to say anything in regard to that, except that his anxiety in that particular direction will, I think, be relieved in a short time, so far as the members of the Commission are concerned. I ask the Minister is his anxiety on this particular matter due to the desire to consider the Report at once and bring in the necessary legislation and give effect to the recommendations of the report before the General Election? In asking that question I take this most suitable opportunity for asking a decision on the matter, and, bearing in mind the statement made already that the Government are considering the question of the railways, having in mind the best methods of securing the most efficient means of transport, it may be correct to say that this might be the means to bring about this very desirable end. I would like to know if the report of the Commission would be taken in conjunction with the legislation that may be necessary to be introduced in connection with the reorganisation of the railways. I would like that he would give some definite assurance, if he is able to do so, on that particular matter in his reply.
I want most emphatically to endorse what Mr. Johnson has said about this report on the roads. One thing is going to happen if a report such as this is shelved indefinitely, and it is this, that Deputies and other persons who are asked to attend such Commissions and spend their time in a careful study of vital questions will simply regard these Commissions as a huge farce, if something is not done to put in operation the recommendations made after mature discussion. I think it will be fatal or, at least, a very grave injury will be done to the prosecution of similar enquiries, if it should be the fate of this particular report that it is pigeon-holed until some remote or indefinite date. I am anxious to urge upon the Minister to secure from the Government some undertaking that steps will be taken to put this report into operation so far as possible and as soon as possible. I want also to allude to one or two other things to which the Minister referred in his opening statement. He referred to the fact that an enlightened policy in fiscal matters was absolutely necessary to the life of the country. With that sentiment I am in absolute agreement. I do not know whether our definitions of an enlightened policy would coincide.
I heard with satisfaction, not only in answer to the question last week, but also the repetition of that answer to-day, the figures given in regard to the percentages or contracts within the Saorstát. I think that is excellent. But what is really going to happen in my opinion is that if there is not a revision of the general economic policy of the country there is great danger that there will be no Irish manufacturers to place contracts with. The Minister says industries must be on a sound economic basis to meet foreign competition and he followed that up by a statement or an implication—I do not know whether these were his exact words— that "to secure that sound economic basis antiquated methods must be discarded and modern methods must be adopted and inefficiency must be eliminated from industrial matters." We agree in the latter, but the inference I draw from the statement he made was that these Industrial Pioneers or Captains of Industry are to be expected to secure that sound economic basis themselves without any intervention on the part of the State to assist them in any way. Now there has been a most extraordinary policy in vogue in Ireland for many years and it is this: That while it is the soundest possible statesmanship for the State to intervene to put Agriculture in a sound financial economic position so as to give it a chance, it is the last word in economic folly for the State to intervene on behalf of the other great arm of the Nation's life—Industrialism If it is sound statesmanship in one, it is sound statesmanship in the other. If it is erroneous in one is it not equally erroneous in the other? If it is an economic fallacy or delusion that the State should assist industrialists, then it equally follows that the State has been following the most fantastic economic illusion in trying to meet agriculture in its demands.
As a matter of personal explanation, and in order to relieve the Deputy, I might say his inference is altogether in error. What I had hoped the Deputy would infer was in fact that the Fiscal Commission had been set up to enable the State to see whether it could in justice help Industry and not that the State should stand aloof.
I am extremely glad to hear that my apprehensions were not correct. But I certainly think that there was an unnecessary emphasis laid upon the phrases "inefficiency""modern methods," and "sound business basis for manufacture." Taking them on the whole I think they are not inefficient, and they are doing all they can to attain to the best modern methods. I do not know whether many here are aware of it or not, but there are manufacturing industries and manufacturing concerns that are practically shivering on the brink of extinction, and that because of the particular fiscal system that has operated, and that continues to operate. They cannot afford to wait for several gentlemen of academic distinction, meeting in some place remote from these concerns, to arrive at a decision. Their verdict in the long run may be all right, their operations may have been perfectly successful in evolving the soundest fiscal system, but in the meantime the unfortunate patient may have expired. They may produce splendid economic theory for this country, and a splendid fiscal system, but the Industrial basis upon which that system was to operate may have vanished from the scene of things when that report is made.
I urge that this matter cannot brook delay. The Industrial life of Ireland is now practically in the condemned cell, and all we can do is to try and keep it alive by getting at least a respite if not a reprieve.
In common with other members of the Dáil I wish to congratulate the Assistant Minister for Industry and Commerce upon his very excellent report. I think that we have been lucky enough in land affairs for some time past, and I venture to say that we should concentrate a little more now upon marine matters. Looking at the particular report on Marine Service, the preservation of life and the establishment of rocket and life-saving apparatus, I see only £550. I venture to say this is a very pressing and rather important matter, and as one who lives by the sea and knows a little bit about it, or thinks he does, this matter of lifeboat and rocket apparatus I think should be very much more fully looked into. We are now in the summer, and winter is on the approach. We have for the last year or two been extremely fortunate, because I do not think there was any loss of life off the Irish coast owing to want of rocket apparatus or lifeboat assistance, but I respectfully suggest that the whole question should be seen to now. I do not know if the men who form the coast watching service have anything to do with this matter, but I think they should be linked up, and crews and all the necessary paraphernalia should be got together as quickly as possible. I do not see any mention here about lighthouse lights. Now, that is a very important matter, and I think some of us would be very anxious to know exactly something about the Irish lights.
As regard the roads, this is a very important and pressing matter, but so far no report has been issued. I am sure when it is, it will be very practical, and we will be all very anxious to see it. As regards the fiscal question mentioned by the last speaker, I am quite at one with him and am still of opinion it would have been better perhaps if some sort of a compromise had been arrived at, and if some practical businessmen were sitting upon that Commission. However, I suppose afterwards the practical businessmen will have the opportunity of meeting these other gentlemen. I sincerely agree with Deputy Milroy that the fiscal question in general is one of paramount importance for the Nation and permits of no delay. While I might say I am in favour of protection myself, I think protection should be practised with discrimination and practised only in such a manner as to protect the existing factories that we have in Ireland. I for one would like to see the Clondalkin Paper Mills working again and the Glass Works down the river working and these are institutions and factories that deserve protection.
I would like to say a word or two in connection with this debate. I agree with the Minister for Industry and Commerce in saying that all industries should be placed on a sound economic basis and I am just wondering what control he has over the different Railway Companies in the Saorstát and whether he is in a position to institute an inquiry into the freights charge because it appears to me that in some instances freights are adopted indiscriminately and out of all proportion to the value of the goods carried. The railways in the Saorstát in the past few years have decreased their servants' wages but they have not so far as I know decreased the freights on goods and that has militated against the State as a whole and against the individual members of the State.
In the Six Counties, I understand, the average increase in freights, as compared with pre war, was 150 per cent., and it is now 100 per cent. We have not got a decrease like that in the Saorstát, and it ought to be apparent to everybody that that will militate against the Saorstát in favour of the Six Counties. That is not a desirable state of affairs at a time when the 26 Counties are trying to find their feet. I would press for an answer as to whether the Minister has any control over the railways, to the extent that he could institute an inquiry, because I have come across cases from my own area where cheap articles of manufacture could not be exported owing to high railway freight charges. We have a factory in Wexford for the manufacture of clay pipes, and at the present moment the proprietor of it is unable to send his manufactured goods outside of Wexford owing to the high freights that prevail. These are articles which are manufactured cheaply, and their manufacture gives a good deal of employment in the area, but for the reason I have given it has been found impossible to develop the industry, simply because of the high freight charges that prevail. If, as the Minister stated, it is his desire to assist to put the industries of the country on a sound economic basis, I think the proper thing to do at the beginning would be to institute an inquiry into the question of freights. There are many people in Ireland at the moment who believe that the present high freights are actually killing the industries of the country. The cost on the people of the country for food stuffs, because of high freights, is enormous. I would like to know from the Minister if, in the evidence tendered at the Food Prices' Commission, this aspect of the situation was taken into consideration. Like Deputy Johnson, I would press on the Minister that the report from the Reconstruction Committee, in connection with the roads, should not be allowed to be shelved. Everybody knows that the roads in the Saorstát are a by-word. They have been neglected during the past four or five years, and owing to the conditions that prevailed in the country it was not easy to give them the attention that they warranted. I hope that the Minister and the members of the Dáil, irrespective of the Parties to which they belong, will press on the Ministry of Finance to see that the roads in the Saorstát are attended to. This is a very important matter just now, when motor traffic is being developed to such a large extent in conveying manufactures and food stuffs from one part of the country to another. I think that the report that has been sent in from the Reconstruction Committee should engage the serious attention of the Government, and I urge on the Assistant Minister for Industry and Commerce not to allow the Ministry of Finance to shelve this important report.
I desire to draw the attention of the Minister to delays that have occurred in the payment of unemployment benefits. Some claims that I know of were sent in 8 or 9 weeks ago, and so far the men have received no benefits. It is very hard to expect men to come in day after day to sign up the forms in the offices of the Labour Exchange, and at the same time to receive no benefit. I am sure the Minister will attend to that matter. Yesterday I put in a question about the Newbridge Exchange which is in my area, and I hope the Minister will see that the work in that office is speeded up a bit. For the last twelve months I have been listening to complaints with regard to that office, and I think the work done in it ought to meet with the Minister's earnest attention. I understand that the office is understaffed, and that the present staff is not able to deal with all the claims sent in. As far as the roads are concerned, I think the report from the Reconstruction Committee should be proceeded with at once. If that were done it would have the effect of providing much needed employment for a large number of men throughout the rural areas of the country, and especially in the constituency that I represent, which embraces important trunk roads leading to and from practically every corner of Ireland. The County Council in my area did all that it was possible for it to do in keeping the trunk roads in repair, even though it did not receive very much financial support from the Ministry. Therefore, I would urge on the Minister to see that the recommendations of the Reconstruction Committee, as regards the roads, are put into operation at once.
On a point of order, the Minister will now, I presume, reply, but, I take it, it is not to be inferred that he is concluding the debate. I am asking the question for this reason, that I have addressed certain questions to him as a preliminary to certain comments that I wish to make. It has generally been considered that, on the estimates, such information could be provided, and when I have that information I shall then be in the position to deal with the matters that I propose to raise.
We are at present engaged on a general debate on the estimate, and after that specific items can be further discussed. This is a general debate on the estimate presented as a whole by the Minister, and on the lengthy statement made by the Minister with regard to all the work which concerns his Department. Later on, it will be quite open to anyone to deal with specific items in the estimate.
Am I to take it that after the Minister has concluded his general statement the estimate will not necessarily be put to the Dáil?
Certainly not. As I have stated, specific items can be discussed later on.
The matter which Deputy Figgis raised on the general discussion is a matter of detail which will come up later on, but I could give an answer straight away, to which he could make any objection that he wishes afterwards. Let me first deal with his question. he wanted to know who is Consulting Engineer to the Government, his terms of appointment and his salary. The Deputy will observe that our estimates include no salary for the Consulting Engineer to the Government. The name of the Consulting Engineer is Crowley and Partners.
And the terms and conditions of appointment?
The terms and conditions of the Consulting Engineer's appointment and his salary are matters for the Minister for Finance.
I do not quite understand the Minister, I am afraid. He says the salary is a matter for the Minister for Finance and we are already told that he is getting no salary.
I did not state that. I stated that on our estimates there was no provision for his salary.
I misunderstood the Minister. Can we assume that he is receiving salary or that he is not receiving salary?
A question was put as to what his salary was upon these estimates and in these estimates there was no salary appearing for the office of Consulting Engineer to the Government. We assume that if he does work as Consulting Engineer to the Government he does it in other capacities than that of Commerce and Industry. I do not know if his salary appears in any other estimate, but the Minister specifically states that he gets none from the Ministry of Industry and Commerce.
I would like to know if the Minister is going to be allowed to reply or if he is to be subjected to questions every time he opens his mouth?
There is no provision in our estimates for any salary for that office, nor do we appoint the terms of reference of the Consulting Engineer. We did originally provide clerical workers for him, as his work was largely engaged in dealing with matters in which the Ministry was interested from the point of view of trade and labour in the country— the reconstruction of the railways—and we did provide a salary for these workers. With regard to the point raised by Deputy Milroy as to the sum of £395,955, of which he said only £41,000 is spent on trade, I would point out to the Deputy that if he will look at the estimates he will observe that of that sum £200,000 is for contributions to the Unemployment Fund and to special schemes, on page 170, estimate 55. With regard to what Deputy Milroy said about the Fiscal Commission, I need not tell him that he was altogether wrong in his inference from my statement. The Deputy pointed out that if manufacturers were waiting for the report of the Fiscal Inquiry the industries in which they are interested would have been, I think he said, executed. I know he referred to the industries as being in the condemned cell. I would point out to the Deputy that it is not the manufacturers who are waiting on the Fiscal Inquiry but it is the Fiscal Commission who are waiting on the manufacturers. They have advertised and re-advertised in the Press and the manufacturers have been looking for an extension of the time in order to prepare their case though they have had months of notice of the fact that the Inquiry was being set up. The Deputy is misinformed if he thinks that the manufacturers are waiting on the Inquiry; they are not. With regard to the point raised by Deputy Johnson about the purchases, what the Deputy states is quite correct. It would be misleading if I did not give the figures of our purchases for the Saorstát. I understand that all the purchases that have been made since the 1st March, for which period only I have figures available, have been made through the Government's Contracts Committee. The Local Government Purchasing Department, the Army Quartermaster-General's Department, the Board of Works, Post Office and the Stationery Office, all have representatives on the Contracts Committee, and all their purchases are made through the Committee— all have to go before it. So that when I stated the other day that 93 per cent. of the average of purchases were made within the Saorstát I believed the Deputy might assume that the figure represented 93 per cent. of all the purchases made by the State Departments since the 1st March. Deputy Johnson also wanted to know something more definite with regard to policy than I have stated with reference to a number of questions which are under consideration. What was our policy as regards the Patents and Trade Marks Act? The principles of the old Act were principles which we think were such as could be followed in the Saorstát, with some tightening up so as to safeguard the interests of the Saorstát. It is now not so much a question of principle as of the particular method of the application of the principle. The principles that the Government have adopted are simply being considered and their practical application is now what the legal adviser is to recommend.
Might I interrupt the Minister to ask if he will amplify that? Does it mean that the right to exploit a patent within the Saorstát may be, if the legal way is found clear, dependent upon the manufacturer of articles patented within the Saorstát to some degree, which I think is the policy which has been adopted in England?
I should not like to commit myself to an answer, but I think, generally speaking, what the Deputy assumes is correct. He raised the question of policy with regard to the Trade Facilities Act. There again it is a question of what money the Ministry of Finance has at its disposal. It is not a question of principles or policy; it is exactly a question of how much money is available for the execution of our policy. Another question in which, no doubt, Deputy Johnson was keenly interested was road reconstruction. Evidently and obviously the Deputy will agree that the amount of execution which can be given to any recommendation from any source will depend exactly on what finance is available from the State to carry out such works. He asks: is it the policy of the Ministry to shelve the Report of the Reconstruction Commission? I can tell him that the policy which the Minister enunciated in setting up the Commission is the policy which the Ministry, at any rate, shall continue to pursue.
I have already stated that that Report was submitted to the two Ministries which are interested with us, the Ministry of Local Government and Ministry of Finance. The Ministry of Local Government has, I think, actually expressed its approval of the Report, and it is there again a question of how much money the State has at its disposal to carry into execution the very excellent recommendations of the Reconstruction Commission. On the question of railways, Deputies Johnson and Davin wanted to know something about what the principles of agreement of the railway companies would be and if we had indicated to the railway companies the principles along which we should like their form of agreement to run. We did indicate that to the railway companies. The principles along which we wished the agreement to run are the principles enunciated by the Minister in his speech last December. They have not changed. Deputy Davin raised the question of the Statistical Department. The principal statistics of import and export trade will be derived, not in the slipshod manner in which Deputy Davin fears they may be collected, but from returns rendered compulsorily to the Customs authorities, which is the Department concerned in the matters mentioned. This Ministry takes up with the Customs authorities any modification necessary to increase the value of returns from the statistical point of view. Traders cannot be pressed too far until the new Customs arrangements have been working for some time. It will take some time until they are running smoothly and working efficiently.
Deputy Corish asked if we had any control over railways at present, and if we can control their rates. We have no control over them at the present moment. He also asked if we will set up a Commission and inquire into their rates. In view of, as I hope, the very early reorganisation of the railways, I do not think the setting up of a Commission would be very helpful or that it would expedite matters. The Deputy of course will understand that a reorganisation scheme will include due provision for the regulation of rates. On the point raised by Deputy Dr. White about marine services, I would point out that under Estimate 57, to which I think he referred, the Coast Watching Service should really be included in E. It should read, instead of £550 in one case and £8,000 in another, £8,550. Deputy Milroy was also interested in the Marine Service and wanted to know what we were doing with that £8,000. The Coast Watching Service for which £8,000 is provided there is intended for life-preservation work, work in case of shipwrecks, maintenance of life-saving apparatus, the organising and exercising of voluntary life-saving crews. It does not follow because £8,000 is indicated in the Estimate that all the £8,000 will be called for, but it has to be considered in view of the average, taking it over several years, that it might be necessary. Deputy Milroy was also interested in an item of £1,000 for a Dublin to Cork steamer. I can assure the Dáil that that £1,000 will not be called upon at all. The Estimate was drawn up at a time when we thought we would have to subsidise a service from Dublin to Cork in view of the desire to secure the general good of the community. The necessity did not arise and the money will not be expended.
Deputy Colohan referred to claims for unemployment benefit, and if he would bring to the notice of the Ministry any particular case or cases, I can assure him that they will have immediate attention. We cannot take action unless we get data, and if he supplies it we will take immediate action.
I sent in particulars of eight or nine claims to the Ministry yesterday, which I think he will be able to deal with.
I can assure the Deputy that if he sent them in yesterday I have not yet seen them, and in any case I think he will admit that he could hardly expect to have them dealt with to-day. I guarantee now that the moment any claims are received in the Ministry they will be dealt with. I think these were the chief points raised in the general discussion.
I do not know whether or not the Committee would consider it convenient to take, page by page, these sub-heads dealing with salaries, and if anybody has any question to raise on each of them we could deal with it as we go by, and so come to the end. That would prevent anybody being shut out by taking some later item before the one on which he desires to raise a question and we can take the paper put into our hands this morning giving the summary of sub-head A, "Salaries, wages and allowances."
With regard to the Establishment Branch may one ask, as a matter of general information, whether it is fair to infer that there is such a branch in all departments, because I had gathered, and I think other Deputies were also under the impression, that the Establishment Branch of the Finance Department was handling all these generally? As a matter of general information one would like to know what the meaning of this branch is, seeing that there is a branch in connection with the Finance Department.
I want to raise a question on this respecting the attitude of the Employment Officers to applicants for Unemployment Insurance benefit. It is somewhat commonly stated that in applying for unemployment benefit certain classes of workmen and women have it suggested to them that there is employment to be found in England, or in Belfast, or in other parts of the North of Ireland. The question, having been raised, was pressed. The people concerned were not prepared to say definitely that the officer tried to make it a condition that the applicant would accept employment in England, but the suggestion was made sufficiently strong as to suggest to those applicants that if employment offered in England they were bound to take it or lose their right to unemployment insurance. Now, I say that the complainants in the matter, when pressed, quite clearly acknowledged that it was not made a condition, that the suggestions were not put to them in such a way as to imply that their duty was to accept employment in England, or they would run the risk of losing their unemployment insurance. I know that that is not the policy of the Ministry. I am sure it is not, and I think it is well that Employment Officers should be made to understand that they have no right to suggest to citizens of this Saorstát who are entitled to unemployment insurance benefit that they must, or ought, to accept employment if it is offered across the water and I suggest to the Ministry that a circular letter embodying that might well be distributed to the Employment branches.
Deputy Johnson's question is really on the Employment Branch. It is preceding mine, is it not?
I understood that we were on the Employment Branch.
Well, the Employment Officers appear on the Establishment Branch also. I do not know whether that affects the matter or not.
That was a question of grade, the particular grade of officer.
I think it would probably be more convenient if the Minister dealt with each branch as we go through them.
With regard to the point raised by Deputy Johnson, I shall have inquiries made, and consider what steps we can take in the matter.
Perhaps I may say that the direct suggestion—the latest suggestion—was rather in relation to women workers in tailoring trades.
As to Deputy Figgis question regarding the Establishment Branch, I think that some of the larger Ministries have a similar branch. We have a very large staff on account of the number of departments in the Ministry, and the various Employment Exchanges throughout the country, and it would be absolutely impossible to carry on efficiently without having an Establishment Branch of our own which really deals with questions of staff register, etc., and I think the Deputy will appreciate that for efficient work we should have some officer who would look after our staff.
I entirely agree with the point of view that the Minister has presented. I am not raising it in any spirit of criticism, but rather that one should know exactly what the procedure was. I think it would be a matter of agreement that in any department so extensive as this some such branch as this should exist in order that direct responsibility could be obtained. But inasmuch as it deals with the question of organisation I am rather anxious now to discover from the Minister if he will assist me in this matter to find out what the communication is between the Establishment Branch of this Department, as an example, and the Establishment Branch of the Finance Department; whether the Establishment Officer of this Department is in any sense directly responsible, plus the responsibility to himself, to the Finance Department, in the same manner as the Finance officer of his Department would be responsible to that other Department.
There is no direct responsibility on the part of the Officer, but they work in very close relation, one with the other. The entire Establishment Branch of the Ministry is, of course, subject to the Ministry of Finance. The Ministry of Finance has to provide the salaries in every case, and our Establishment Branch sees that the staff at the disposal of the Ministry is utilised to the best advantage.
The Trade Department.
Would it be under this or the next Industrial Department that one could raise best, or would naturally arise, the question of the present dock strike?
That would be on the Industrial Department.
I would like to find out whether or not, under this Department the supervision of Irish lightships and Irish Lights comes in. I cannot find in any of the references any sums devoted to the payment of lights or lightships, and this may be the Department that covers such expenses. If it does not, we might find out what Department of this Ministry of Industry and Commerce, if any, does the provision of lights round the coast come within.
resumed the Chair at this stage.
The Irish Lights service has not yet been transferred. The Deputy will recollect that it is to come up at a convention between the British Government and the Government of An Saorstát. The Government is in communication with the British Government on the subject. When it is taken over by the Irish Government it will, of course, come up under this particular Branch.
I addressed one or two questions to the Minister with regard to an Irish trade flag which he has assured me has received the attention of his Department, and with respect to which legislation is projected. I would like to know from him now how far that legislation has proceeded, and when it may be expected to be brought before the legislature.
A Bill on the subject, in which the Deputy is so deeply interested, is at present with the Law Officers for consideration. I think the Deputy was so informed some time ago by the President.
Will the Minister oblige with a little more information with regard to the position of the Irish Lights? Is it supposed to be a Treaty understanding, or is it something that happened since the Treaty?
There is a special reference in the Treaty to the maintenance of Irish Lights.
An Annexe of the Treaty. It is in the Constitution, Annexe 2 (b).
The reference is as follows:—"That lighthouses, buoys, beacons, and any navigational marks or navigational aids shall be maintained by the Government of the Irish Free State as at the date hereof, and shall not be removed or added to except by agreement with the British Government." and "a Convention shall be made between the British Government and the Government of the Irish Free State to give effect to these conditions."
If lighthouses, buoys, beacons and navigational marks or navigational aids were being maintained by the Government of the Free State at that date, I presume they are still being maintained by the Government of the Irish Free State?
The Deputy will see it states that:—"A Convention shall be made between the British Government and the Government of the Irish Free State." That Convention has not yet been made, but is the subject of communication between the two Governments.
I think the Minister has not the paper before him. It reads:—"That lighthouses, buoys, beacons, and any navigational marks or navigational aids shall be maintained by the Government of the Irish Free State as at the date hereof and shall not be removed or added to except by agreement with the British Government." Are we to understand that the Irish Free State is not maintaining, and will not maintain, these until this Convention has been made, and an agreement arrived at to give effect to that Convention.
Probably if Deputy Johnson were present when that Article of the Treaty was drawn up, the language would have been more explicit. I take it there that the Convention to be made between the two Governments is to be to the effect that the Irish Government, when it shall have taken over the service from the British Government shall maintain the service as it was being maintained at the date the Treaty was signed. The Convention has not yet been made between the two Governments.
I only hope that the cost of maintaining these lighthouses, buoys and beacons, will continue to be borne by the British Government. I have no objection to that whatever, but I assume from this that at least some of the charges would be borne by the Free State, and that we should have seen some reference to them in the Estimates.
Is it not correct to say that some of the employés of the Irish Lights Commissioners have been transferred temporarily or permanently to the Coastal Marine Service?
Unless some of them have been lent, none have been transferred to my knowledge.
May we take it, from the answer of the Minister, that, so far, Irish lights, lighthouses, buoys, beacons, lightships and all that service are concerned, they are not within their control, and any questions regarding the employment of the people in that service, or regarding the repairs of lightships and the like, are outside the control of the Free State Government?
At the moment that is correct.
Is this the Department that is responsible, or to whom would you look to deal with imported goods? I have on many occasions drawn the attention of the Ministers to the fact that railway wagons and engines have been, and are being, imported, when works are available, and men are in the ranks of the unemployed who could manufacture engines and wagons under reasonable conditions here. I have been approached quite recently with regard to the rumour that a large Irish railway company intends to bring in some coaches, but I have been informed by an official of the Ministry that such is not the case. However, a little while ago you would have seen in the press—the "Freeman's Journal" and other papers—photographs of engines that were being imported from Byer and Peacocke of Manchester. As a matter of fact I have seen some of these engines quite recently, and I think in any compensation or any money being paid out of State funds for the renewal of rolling stock, that this particular department should keep a very close eye on the companies concerned, and see that any rolling stock destroyed in the recent troubled period will not be replaced from Byer and Peacocke of Manchester, or any other people outside. The reason I draw the attention of the Minister to this matter is, there is a considerable amount of unemployment in the particular trades that can help in the manufacture of engines and carriages, and there seems to be a disposition on the part of the railway companies —particularly in the case of one company that has big works in this country—to import engines and carriages that could certainly be made in their own works.
I hope that the Minister and the person at the head of this Department will watch this thing carefully, and see that no rolling stock is replaced at the expense of the Government by being imported from the firm I have referred to, or any other firm across the Channel.
The complaints to which the Deputy refers were made of one Company only. Of course, the Deputy will realise we have no power to compel them in the ordinary course of business to buy here, there, or anywhere else. However, we have been in communication with a particular Company, and that Company has agreed that where stock is being replaced through payment made for compensation in regard to damage of rolling stock in the past, it will consult us first before placing any orders for such stock.
I understood from a reply the President gave to a question I asked on the Compensation Bill concerning the railways, that it was only fair to expect that any money given to a Railway Company or Companies should be utilised within the Saorstát for the replacement of destroyed rolling stock. I want the assurance given on that occasion to be safeguarded, and that no money will go out of this State to take away from the ranks of the unemployed in England when it could be utilised here with the very same object. The Minister says that the Company gave an assurance that it would consult the Government. I take it that it is up to the Government to see that any promise the President made—and I assume it to mean that rolling stock would be replaced by being made in the Companies' own works—will be carried out. It is not merely a question of consultation; the Ministry should insist on the carrying out of that undertaking given by the President.
We will do everything we possibly can to see that that undertaking is carried out.
Arising out of an answer given to me in connection with railway freights, if it is proved that a particular industry was suffering in consequence of high freights, will the Government make representations to the Railway Companies?
I have already made two representations of the very nature suggested, to certain Railway Companies, one as late as yesterday.
I want to raise the question of Trades Boards. I am glad to note there are two Inspectors for Trades Boards included in this year's Estimate. They did not appear in last year's Estimate and probably this is due to a rearrangement. I would like to have some word from the Minister regarding what is contemplated in respect to Trades Boards. I think there are indications that the policy of the Ministry is undergoing some change in regard to them, and I am hopeful that we will get a reassurance from the Minister that they are not thinking of following the lines of the British Government in this matter. The organisation of Trades Boards has been valuable and has helped, I am convinced, to promote to some degree that efficiency of organisation amongst the employers that the Minister in his opening statement put forward as something to be desired. There is a protection of the better organised and more efficient industrial establishments through the establishment of Trades Boards, and I would urge that it is desirable to maintain this policy and not to try and revoke it even to the degree that they are doing in England. I think that there may be improvements made, and I think there should be some rearrangement in regard to the Boards which at present exist. In this as in so many cases we have simply taken over the practice that has prevailed in England and have put into a single Board classes of Trade which are not fitting. I refer, for instance, to the hats, caps and millinery Trades Board. That is just an instance where you have, as in England, a very big machined millinery trade. It might be quite appropriate in England, but it is not appropriate here to tie together under the one Board hats, caps and millinery, because millinery is not a factory industry in this country.
I would urge the desirability of finding a method of consultation, conference, or joint meeting occasionally, between Boards which deal with similar classes of trade. Take the stitching industries; you have hats, caps, millinery and tailoring Boards, wholesale and retail Tailoring and shirt-making Trades Boards. It seems to me that some advantage would be gained if methods could be found for bringing those Boards into some kind of conference, to have something like a co-ordinated policy, so that there would not be the inducement for apprentices, or learners in the one trade, whose wages are fixed at a certain rate, being transferred to another trade, say, where wages are fixed at a lower rate. I think that some kind of co-ordination between trades which deal with somewhat similar materials should be attained. In this respect I am thinking more of the learners in the trades and the rates that they fix for learners. There is, perhaps, another suggestion that one might make with regard to the better organisation of the Trades Boards, and it may be more appropriate to put this suggestion forward in writing, provided we have some assurance from the Ministry that their intention was to continue the Boards, and to improve and strengthen rather than to weaken them. I think that there are signs that the Ministry is thinking of a change, but before going very far in this criticism I would like to have some views expressed from the Ministry as to what their mind is on this matter.
Now, I come to the question of Factory inspection. I would like to urge upon the Ministry the necessity for increasing the number of Factory Inspectors, and seeing that their work is done more thoroughly in the next year than it has been done, or perhaps has been possible to have it done, in the last couple of years. In the appointment of Factory Inspectors, I would suggest that there should be a preference given to persons who have some knowledge of the work of factories, some knowledge, from practical experience, of factory life. I know this is a difficult proposition, and I know that it is not always the person who has the most intimate knowledge of factory life who makes the best Factory Inspector. But where it is possible to find such a person with the knowledge, capacity and ability which is required of a Factory Inspector, who has also practical experience, it is very desirable that the practical experience should be taken into account and preference given to such a person. In respect of the Inspectors under the Trades Boards, it is especially valuable to have an Inspector who has had some experience of the working of the industries that he has to inspect. I am sure that the Minister's own experience will confirm that statement. There are so many tricks, there are so many bye-ways, there are so many opportunities for the cute employer who sets himself out to evade the law in these matters, that one who knows the industry in its inner workings is usually better able to pick out the flaws, and point out the defects, than one who would come to it fresh and without any practical knowledge. I would, therefore, press upon the Ministry the necessity of increasing the number of Factory Inspectors and, where possible, to include in the number people of experience in the working of the kind of factories or of the Trades Boards that they will have to deal with. I hope the Minister will make some statement and give us some assurance on the question of Trade Boards. I will defer any further statement I have until I hear that.
With regard to the question of Trade Boards, which Deputy Johnson has raised, the system in all respects is not working satisfactorily. The Orders that have been given by some Boards have proved very difficult to enforce, particularly in smaller towns throughout the country. Sometimes in the reports which come from the Trade Boards it has been found that the conditions of the particular place have not always been fully considered. The Ministry has been in consultation with some of the Boards as to how the difficulties of the kind, which I have suggested, may be overcome. The Boards up to the present have not made any useful suggestions to us. The whole question of Trade Boards needs very careful consideration by the Ministry. We find that as a result of the work of these Boards up to the present we have not come to any definite conclusion about the future of these Boards, or the lack of future, and we certainly shall be very glad to have any views which Deputy Johnson may give us. I think he suggested putting something in writing about the matter. His views will have very full and careful consideration when the whole question of Trade Boards comes under consideration. With regard to Factory Inspectors, the Ministry has, as the Deputy is aware, more than one kind of inspector and we are not sure it would not be better—certainly it would be more economic, and we do hope it would make for greater efficiency —if we combined the duties of the Inspectors. The general principle which the Deputy has stated, that when a candidate for inspectorship had any practical knowledge of factory work he should have preference for appointment, is one with which I fully concur. That is the view of the Ministry at present. I may state that at present the whole question of inspectorship is under consideration.
I feel that the statement of the Minister regarding the future of Trade Boards is rather ominous. The statement that they have not been working satisfactorily in the small towns and that the Boards have not been able to make any suggestion to remedy the evil that may be complained of by those who made the complaints rather suggests that the complaints about the working of the Boards have come from a class of employer who always did oppose the Trade Boards and wants to have a chance to compete in the small towns with low-paid sweated labour against the better organised and higher paid labour of the City. It is because I feared that there was something like that afoot I raised the question. I hope that the Ministry will not commit itself to any change of policy with regard to the Trade Boards without having had a very full inquiry and a thorough discussion with all those people interested in the Trade Boards. The Boards have undoubtedly served a valuable purpose in the country and have protected the sweated worker and have protected the employer who tried to be fair against the competition of employers who had no desire to be fair but merely took advantage of the distress and need of the unemployed and poor workman, woman, or child. It will be a very bad day if the policy of the Trade Boards is thrown over board, and I am very fearful that the influences that have been at work with a view to the abolition of the Trade Board may be having some effect upon the mind of the Ministry. I hope, as I say, without going further into the matter, that the Minister will be very slow indeed to commit himself to any policy which implies the abolition of the Trade Boards.
I can assure the Deputy that the consideration that is being given to the question of the Trade Boards at present by the Ministry is very, very careful, and I have asked the Deputy to be good enough to let us have his views on the subject in writing. His views will, I am sure, be well considered and be very well worthy of the consideration which they shall get. At the moment the Ministry is not committed to any policy with regard to the future of Trade Boards. I quite fully recognise that the principle of the Trade Board is a good one and the difficulties which have arisen have been difficulties of administration throughout the small towns of the country. The difficulties are not so easily recognisable in cities. The Deputy may be fully assured that the matter shall have very earnest consideration, and I would again press him to be good enough to submit his views on the question in writing to the Ministry.
At an earlier stage I asked the Minister if he would make a statement to-day generally with regard to two or three strikes that are disturbing the country, and particularly with regard to the Dockers' Strike. Statements are made in the paper from day to day, and we have not yet had represented to us exactly what the Department has done to bring this to an end. It is a matter that hardly requires to be stated in this Dáil, that from the first moment the strike was started, the Department was busy in the matter. I urge an opportunity should be taken in this particular section of the Vote to deal with that in as much as it seems to me to arise under it. I would urge the Minister to deal with that matter. Seeing the hour is so late I would suggest we report progress, and that he make a statement on the situation at the opening of to-morrow's business.
No doubt the Deputy has the interests of the community at heart and is anxious to see this great Dockers' Strike settled. So am I. That Minister who the Deputy considers does so little work has being all day busy in connection with this strike. Early this morning he was engaged in connection with it. We have kept constantly in touch with both parties to this dispute. We are keeping in touch with them, and I do not think that any fuller statement from me at the moment is going to be in any degree helpful to the conclusion of the dispute.
Before passing from this may I just say this. It is liable to get into common circulation that this is a strike. It is not a strike. I ask the Dáil to bear that in mind, to ask yourselves what is a strike. Here you have a large number of men who are employed on certain terms and on a given day the employers say "You shall not work any longer unless you take certain other terms." That is not a strike. That is definitely a lock-out. I would very much prefer in a matter of this kind, which will perhaps assume very big proportions, that there should be some clarity of thinking on the matter at the early stages. The employers have taken the initative in this matter, and they have locked out their workmen because they would not accept lower wages. It is not a strike, it is a lock-out.
I did not refer to it as a strike.
The Minister used the word "dispute."
I used the word strike as a general connotation of it. I desire to substitute the word "dispute."
We will take up the Estimate on Statistical Department next.
I am sorry to be always on the job but I would ask if it is possible to circulate to members or at least to those who would like to have the particulars, details regarding unemployment and any other matter of that kind that is likely to be of public interest to members of the Dáil. There are statements issued periodically to the newspapers. Usually they are only summarised in the newspapers. The details would be of interest to members, and there are other statements, which are circulated within the service, of value, that I think members would be able to make public use of. It would not be a matter of cost, for I think the extra cost would be infinitesimal. I would urge that at least matters which are circulated to the newspapers and other statistical matters of public interest be circulated to the Dáil.
I endorse what Deputy Johnson has just said. I have mentioned once or twice before that the information gathered by the Statistical Department, which I take to be the Department that was once functioning under the Department of Agriculture, should be made available for all Deputies. In connection with a Commission that I was connected with some time ago I wrote to two or three countries for statistical information with regard to certain matters of trade and industry, and that information was fully provided in printed form and as much of it as one wanted. When I wrote to one of these countries thanking them for their courtesy in sending information their reply was that it always afforded them the greatest pleasure to give the fullest possible information to everyone in regard to their country. I am sure that is a perfectly sound attitude. I am convinced that all information in our own department should be made available for all Deputies. We have all been interested in a document published in Ireland from year to year containing the statistical report on Imports and Exports. That document is sold at the very heavy price of 10s. It used to be sold at a very much lesser price. I think it is not quite fair that Deputies should have to pay that sum in order to get information concerning the work of their own Departments when one of their Departments exists for gathering the information for their benefit, and primarily I take it for the benefit of those charged by the Nation with the conduct of their National affairs. There is information of that kind and there are monthly statements also which some of us make it our business to see. I think that is an expense placed upon Deputies which should not be placed upon them. I do not know, and would be obliged if the Minister would make a note of it how far this Statistical Department is concerned with the duties that fall to the Department of Industry and Commerce. I believe that the old Statistical Department when it was attached to the Ministry of Agriculture had under its care other matters than matters that normally would fall to the Department of Industry and Commerce. It had Agricultural financial statistics, and how far these are still retained by that sub-Department that has been taken over I do not know, and I would be glad if the Minister would tell us. I suggest that all the information printed by this Statistical Department should be made available for Deputies' or if that is too much to ask, then that it should be, at least, supplied to those Deputies who ask for it and made available for them without charge.
The object of setting up a Statistical Department at all was to collect and publish Statistics for the public and the State. With regard to Deputy Johnson's request that detailed statistics of unemployment should be given to Deputies, I will inquire to see how far we may be able to reach on that request. The Statistical Department has only just installed tabulating machinery, and the Deputy will appreciate that up to the present the process of totalling and tabulating has been a tedious and difficult one. Summaries which appear in the Press are practically the only data given to the Press. The Press did not, in every case, get detailed statistics, and I shall endeavour to have the wishes of Deputy Johnson in the matter complied with as far as we possibly can. I have answered one part of Deputy Figgis's question. It is intended that these Statistics should be made available to the public and much more so to members of this Dáil. The work which the Statistical Department will execute at the request of the Minister for Agriculture was formerly compiled by the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction, and will now be compiled by the Statistical Department of the Ministry of Industry and Commerce. Under the old regime the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction compiled, not alone statistics of agriculture, but also trade statistics. They did that with a view to economy. Now it will make for economy in the present case to have all the statistics compiled by the one Statistical Department, and we hope that our service will be found more efficient than was the very efficient service given by the Statistical Department of the Department of Agriculture in the days that were.
I am interested to learn that the Department of Agriculture's Statistical Department will come under this Department. I did not realise that at first, but I would just like to ask this question respecting a very valuable annual report know, I think, as "The Prettyman-Newman Annual Report." It was for many years published in response to a motion calling for a return dealing with average prices covering a five or a ten-year period—average prices of agricultural produce. That has been printed every year, and it has been a help to those who desired it, at a very low rate. I think that report should be available in the future, and I would hope that the form of it at least would be maintained, and that the report which has been so long prepared should be continued, even though it is not published in the form that it was in the past, and that the figures at least should be available in the same form. I would ask the Minister to make a note of the desirability of keeping the return in the same form as it has been published hitherto, so that comparisons may properly be made as between the figures in the future and in the past. The return is a valuable one and may be familiar to members, and it would be a pity if its continuity were to be broken because of the change in the administration.
I agree with Deputy Johnson that the return to which he refers was a most valuable and interesting one. I shall have a note made, as he requests, and submit it to the Minister for Agriculture. If he decides that such a Report is to continue, our Statistical Department will certainly execute it.
I was not quite able to understand the Minister's reply to me in which he stated, if I remember correctly, that this information was intended for the use of the public and a fortiori for members of this Dáil. Is it to be inferred from that, that members of the Dáil can have these reports if they want them? I suggest that if anyone is prepared to read the volumes on imports and exports, for example, that they ought to be encouraged to do so, whether a member of this Dáil or not.
I am probably one of those who, like the Deputy, believes that the Dáil ought to have a very complete Law Library, a General Library, and a Statistical Library, where all these returns would be available for members who might be of a forgetful disposition, and leave their returns behind. I am certainly of that opinion. The Dáil, too, very obviously could decide what literature it is to have, and what literature it is not to have. I submit, and I think it very plain, that if the public are to have these Statistics, surely the members of the Dáil ought to have them too.
I beg to move that the Committee do now Report Progress and ask leave to sit again to-morrow.
[Agreed.]