"That it is an essential condition precedent to the peaceful development of Industry and Commerce in the Saorstát that the workers should be guaranteed regularity and permanence of employment, and payment for their work at rates sufficient to maintain them and their families in decency and comfort; also, that it is the opinion of the Dáil that the Government should call into conference representatives of employers and workers organisations, for the purpose of devising the best means and methods of providing such regularity and permanence of employment, with satisfactory payment for work done.
COMMITTEE ON FINANCE. - DEVELOPMENT OF INDUSTRY—REGULARITY OF EMPLOYMENT (DEBATE RESUMED).
Motion by
Mr. Johnson:-
The motion on the paper was proposed by Deputy Johnson on Friday last. An amendment was moved by Deputy Whelehan, the Assistant Minister for Industry and Commerce. In lines 2 and 3 to delete the words "be guaranteed" and substitute therefor the word "have," so that the motion if amended would read "That it is an essential condition precedent to the peaceful development of Industry and Commerce in the Saorstát that the workers should have regularity and permanence of employment, etc. Deputy Johnson was speaking on the amendment and moved the adjournment of the debate. He is therefore in possession now.
When I spoke on Friday last, having just the verbal statement of the Minister in my mind regarding the amendment that he proposed to my motion, I did not appreciate at its true value the effect of the amendment which he proposed, and I spoke rather too emphatically in my repudiation of that amendment. I think it is unfortunate that he was not willing to accept the resolution as it was moved, but I desire to say that the amendment which he proposed did not justify my repudiation of it in the very emphatic words which I uttered. Nevertheless, I desire to argue that the motion as moved is better than the amendment of the Minister. The effect of the amendment would be to alter the motion in the sense that whereas I desire to say that there should be a positive assurance given to the workman—that he should have some guarantee of permanence of employment and payment for work done at rates sufficient to maintain him and his family in decency and comfort—the Minister prefers that the Dáil should say that the workers should have regularity and permanence of employment and payment for their work at rates sufficient to maintain themselves and their families in decency and comfort, and he is prepared to say that the Government should call into conference representatives of employers' and workers' organisations for the purpose of devising the best means of providing such regularity and permanence of employment with satisfactory payment for work done.
In the course of the discussion it rather seemed, from the statements that were made by one or two Deputies, that the motion involved primarily a State guarantee of permanence of employment. What is implied in the motion is that the organisations of workmen and employers, the economic organisations of the country, should endeavour to devise means and methods of achieving the end which may be generally considered to be a desirable end, and that quite conceivably those organisations may themselves devise such ways and means without the intervention of any State authority; nevertheless, failing such ways and means being absolutely watertight, that there should be, as a co-relative guarantee, a State guarantee, backing up and supporting a voluntary guarantee of the organisations of employers and employees. Now, Deputy Magennis implied, and Deputy Whelehan stated in so many words, that the proposition was an idealistic one, and was impracticable because it was idealistic. Well, I demur. I say it is not impracticable, and though it may be idealistic at this moment, it is an ideal which can be realised, and it is incumbent upon us to make an attempt to realise it. There are organisations of employers and employed which have, as a matter of fact, devised ways and means of ensuring permanence of employment in the sense that is referred to here—regularity of employment—and I contend that such organisations in all industries can be arrived at if the will is present. I think that it is unfortunate, most unfortunate, that Deputies should get it into their heads that anything which means a real improvement on present conditions is idealistic, and because it is idealistic it should not be striven for. We are reminded too much of Mr. Gradgrind, "facts, facts, facts," as though the only facts were the sordid ones, as though there were nothing better in life than the sordid things, the things that drive men down.
I want to ask the Dáil to agree with me that there is in humanity something better than the mere greed and acquisitiveness upon which the political economists of the last century based their theories, and upon which, unfortunately, most newspaper leader writers, members of the Dáil, and, I think, Ministers, base their views of political economy, the inexorable economic laws which are supposed to be absolute, and must inevitably lead to the degradation of humanity. I deny the inexorable nature of those laws; I deny that they are laws except on the assumption, which is the assumption of those economists who are looked on as the spiritual fathers of modern commercialism, whose economics are based on one single assumption, that the only constant factor, and therefore the only factor, that can be considered in dealing with human affairs is greed— acquisitiveness. Deputy Magennis said that the doetrine I had expounded "is utterly opposed to the doctrine of class warfare, which is the weed that flourishes when the materialistic conception of life is allowed to replace the proper conception of human values," and that I had dissociated myself clearly and unmistakably from those who espouse the class war doctrines. Deputy Magennis knows, I am sure, but I think it well that other Deputies who are, perhaps, not so conversant with the philosophy which propounded this doctrine of the class war, should know that it is not a doctrine which has to be preached or advocated; People, looking at economic and social life from a certain point of view, contend that it is by the method of class struggle that Society has developed, and I say this, that if the economics advocated, in the daily newspapers by newspapers leader writers, by shipowners in their manifestoes, by Deputies in the Dáil, by Ministers, are true, then class war doctrine is true. If it is true that the one permanent factor which dominates all the rest of human impulses is this factor of acquisitiveness and greed then class war doctrine is the true one and a correct description of the methods whereby human society has developed and will develop. I do not believe in the foundation of that theory. I do not believe that greed is the only factor, that the other factors being accidental and impermanent, need not be taken into account, and therefore I believe that some other method could be developed than the method of class warfare. But any other method cannot be developed than the method of class warfare if we are going to rely constantly and insistently at all times upon the laws of competition, upon essential greed as the impulse which drives humanity forward.
When Deputies ask us to repudiate or to discountenance the doctrine of a class war they are asking us to dispute and discountenance one aspect of the every day doctrine which they are preaching in every walk of life, in every aspect of economic and social life, for they tell us that you cannot expect employers in this country to pay wages at a higher rate than employers in a rival country are paying; that you must reduce the conditions of labour, the price of labour and wages to that of your rivals, because the economic laws compel you. If that is the case, if these laws, so called, are inexorable, as we are told, then inevitably men are driven to combine to obtain possession of these material sources of power, to protect their interests, and to satisfy that fundamental urge which is presumed by the political economists, who are the fathers of these ideas, to be the one dominant and permanent factor which can be taken into account in discussing economic theories. I believe that while society is based, as it is today, upon these laws of competition— that acquisitiveness, the desire for gain, is the one purpose and intent, the end of so much popular teaching—that there is no other end to that doctrine than the doctrine of the class war. Recognising that, I subscribe to that doctrine of the class war, so long as we are forced to work under that system of society which has its foundation, and its rise, in this desire for gain, this urge for acquisition. I want the Dáil to agree that there can be something better, that we can, in this state begin to introduce into the economic and social life of this country from this place, the right place from which such ideas should be generated, a better idea to rally to the growth of society, the higher human impulses, and to keep greed and acquisitiveness in its proper place, subdued and subordinate to something better. We are told that the country cannot afford to continue, it cannot prosper while the present rate of wages, the present conditions of labour exist, that the Irish workman has been able to resist the downward trend of wages, that because wages have fallen in England, Scotland, Germany and Belfast, that, therefore, Irish wages must come down, in the same ratio, or something equivalent. That is asking us to accept a doctrine that though your political rulers have gone, your economic rulers remain, and that you must adapt your mode of life, your conditions of poverty, to the mode of life and the conditions of poverty which exist in other countries. We have tried to encourage men to think, during the last few years, that a political emancipation would give an opportunity for this country to work out a social emancipation for itself, and we are not prepared to accept the view that there shall be a common level, and that the conditions of the lowest will ultimately determine the conditions of the workmen here. I do not believe that it is necessary. I I believe that this country can, if it will, feed, clothe, house and make comfortable, so far as material wealth can do so, its present population, and much more than its present population, out of its own soil, out of its own resources, and I believe that if we are going to adapt our economic life to the circumstances determined by other countries, then we have failed utterly in the attempt towards freedom. When English conditions are quoted, one remembers that in certain industries in England, in some of the greatest industries, the conditions of the workmen are actually much worse to-day than they were pre-war; that the rates of wages are lower, or as low, as they were in 1914, whilst the cost of living is considerably higher; and that not only are the rates of wages lower but the earnings are much lower than they were in those days, while the cost of living is higher, and we are asked to consent to certain conditions here because of those conditions there.
I think it is fallacious to suggest, as the Minister suggested, that with an extension of present activities, with a mere burst of business enterprise, you will gradually absorb the unemployed and solve the problem. You may temporarily, but you will not solve the problem. England is very much more prosperous in the way of production and material wealth per head than Ireland is likely to be for a long time. The problem of unemployment is very grave, and even in the best of times there it has been contended by the so-called captains of industry, and by the more responsible political economists, that the industrial machine depends upon a margin of not less than 5 per cent of unemployed. We know that in America unemployment alternates every few years with over employment, boom following slump and slump following boom. The mere attempt to meet this problem by encouraging commercial activity is not going to solve it. I would ask the Dáil to think of this problem, and its solution as they would think of the permanent problems of life, not casually, not simply echoing the things that have been said for a generation or two by English newspaper writers, politicians, statesmen and economists, all of which things and words have been spoken and written in relation to life under English conditions in England, and industrial conditions in England. I say that to follow on that course is fatal to any hope of a real change in the social life of Ireland, or a real improvement in the social life of Ireland. I have seen very often—in yesterday morning's paper for instance—reference to the necessity for reductions in wages and changed conditions because of the rivalry of other countries, and that such reduction was required as a preliminary to decreases in the cost of living, and that with such adjustments the cost of living in Ireland would inevitably and automatically fall. I want to say here what I have said at more length in a letter to the newspapers, that so far as the workman's life is affected, so far as those things which enter into the average workman's household are concerned, as detailed in the official reports of the Cost of Living Committee, the reduction of wages in Ireland is going to have a very small effect upon the cost of living of the workman's family. The President does not read the papers. Therefore, I will risk repetition at least of the conclusion of that communication——
I saw that all right.
The conclusion is that even though the workmen engaged in the handling, the preparation, the distribution within Ireland of those articles which go to make up the workmen's budget were to work for nothing, the reduction in prices of those articles would not be more than thirty per cent., would be less, as a matter of fact, than 30 per cent., and that if we were to assume a general reduction all round of 20 per cent. in wages the effect upon a household budget, if all the saving were transferred to the consumer in reductions in price, could only mean a reduction of 6 per cent. Now, think of what that means to the workman's family—think of how that is going to appeal to the workman. He knows, as a matter of experience, that wages rose long after prices rose, and he knows, as a matter of experience, that prices fall very slowly and laggardly after wages have fallen. The ultimate end of the example I quoted was with a 20 per cent. reduction in wages, the workman who has been receiving £4 would have his wages reduced to £3 4s., whereas the commodities that that £4 hitherto has been expended on, would only be reduced by 4s. 9d. to £3 15s. 3d. That is to say, with wages of £4 he has been able to buy £4 worth of commodities; henceforth with reducea wages of £3 4s. he would be 11s. 3d. short in buying the same commodities, that is a reduction of 14 per cent. in his purchasing power. That is how it appeals to the workman. I think I can quite confidently challenge any examination of those figures with you. That is how it appeals to the workman, and it is the reason, in my opinion, why the policy of this country should be directed towards a high wages policy, and concurrently an imposed obligation that these high wages should be spent in increasing proportion upon Irish-made and Irish produced commodities.
We may have to find means of imposing that obligation upon the producing elements of the community by tarriffs, or by other means. I do not want to prejudice that question, but I say that for the real prosperity of the country we should rely rather upon high levels of payment, even though high prices continue. I was tempted to follow some of the arguments of Deputy Gorey, but I shall refrain and shall pass them merely by saying that I was not attempting to deal with any single industry or any kind of dispute. I do not want to localise this question in any way. There are many causes which lead to labour disputes, purely economic sometimes, psychological sometimes, hot weather sometimes; but from a good deal of experience and very close inquiry I am convinced that 75 per cent. as I said last week, of the disputes that arise from year to year, have their primary cause in the sense of insecurity, the fear of unemployment. Now, if you could remove the greater part of that fear, you would remove a great part of the causes that lead to disputes. You will not remove them all. I do not pretend for a moment that you are going to remove all the causes of disputes by removing the fear of unemployment; but you will, I am sure, remove the greater portion, and I believe in doing so you are laying the foundations of that prosperity which the Minister for Education spoke of in an earlier discussion. We are told many times, and truthfully, that this country requires great development in mechanical appliances. I believe that is true; but the workmen have resisted the introduction of mechanical appliances. They have resisted it in Ireland as they did in England, Germany, France, and in fact every country in the world. They will resist it in self-defence unless you can promise some assurance that the introduction of these appliances is not going to deprive them of a living, and it is not enough to point to the development in those countries which have been most proficient in the use of mechanical appliances. The workman sees one machine doing ten men's work, and he sees that nine men are going to be deprived of the opportunity of a livelihood. There should be no need for it. The introduction of a machine ought, as a matter of fact, ease the labour while insuring the men of a better living; but, unfortunately, what happens now is that the machine deprives him of a living, and there has to be a period of lag before he and his family can retrieve the loss which the machine causes.
What I desire is that the Dáil should express itself in favour of guaranteeing workmen, who are willing to work, the opportunities for work, or, as an alternative, if we do not so design our economic system, that we should provide them with means of living. I believe it can be done, and with good-will, by the collaboration of the organisers of industry with the operators in industry. It is the function of the organisers of industry to direct the courses of industry to provide for the needs of the people; that is their function.
The profit they make should be incidental, and should not be the objective. I want to see if it is possible to bring these people together and to let them set before themselves the duty of devising means and methods of securing this end, which the Dáil is asked to declare to be a necessary end if there is to be a peaceful development of industry in this country. The Minister says in his amendment that the words "be guaranteed" should be deleted, but he is prepared to say that it is an essential condition precedent to the peaceful development of industry and commerce that the workers should have regularity and permanence of employment, and payment for their work at rates sufficient to maintain them and their families in decency and comfort. He is also willing to say that it is the opinion of the Dáil that the Governments should call into conference representatives of employers and workers' organisations for the purpose of devising the best means and methods of providing such regularity and permanence of employment with satisfactory payment for work done. If the Dáil prefers the amendment to my motion, I shall think that the Dáil has done good work, and the passing of such a motion, even as amended, and the putting of it into operation at the instigation of the Minister, may be the means of laying the foundations, at any rate, for a better social life in this country for the next few years.
I desire quite briefly to support the amendment moved by the Assistant Minister for Industry and Commerce, and the suggestion that this resolution should be adopted with a substitution of the word "have" for the words "be guaranteed." I do not think that Deputy Johnson has put forward anything that is idealistic. I think that the sentiments he expresses, in a very large measure are sentiments that would be supported in many parts of this Dáil. I agree that the ideal expressed in the resolution, as amended by the Minister, is an ideal, in his own words, which can be realised.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle took the chair at this stage.
In order that it should be realised, there are certain elements that, I think, would require more stressing. I agree with Deputy Johnson that the idealistic quality of a man's mind is necessary. There are many conceptions necessary, but there is one that is absolutely essential, and it is that of the efficient conduct of business in this country. The resolution, as it was originally, proposed that the workmen should be guaranteed regularity and permanence of employment. It is impossible to guarantee regularity and permanence of employment. There are elements in the calculation that may make it utterly impossible. Let me give two instances that I speak of with a certain degree of knowledge, in one case having made investigations and in the other case it was a matter that came before me in another connection. Take the dairy industry in Ireland. Are the workers engaged in the dairy industry to be guaranteed regularity and permanence of employment and payment for work at rates sufficient to maintain them and their families in decency and comfort? That they should have it is one thing, but can they be so guaranteed? That means, if the guarantee is to be forthcoming, that the industry must be conducted efficiently. Is it being conducted efficiently?
It is well known, and Deputy Johnson will know it from the results of the inquiries that he conducted on a Commission on which both he and I served together, and from the inquiries of a Commission that he now belongs to, that I am stating what is the truth when I say that of the dairy cattle in this country you might safely take it that between one-half and two-thirds are losing for every day they are being kept. In other words, through lack of proper method of conducting that industry, that industry is not maintaining itself on an economic basis. If the industry is not maintaining itself on an economic basis, through whatever fault, how can it be argued that workmen or anybody in that industry can be guaranteed things that industry cannot give, because it is not being conducted properly? Take another case. A friend of mine to whom I was speaking a fortnight ago is the owner of a very large factory in Dublin. He employs a large number of hands. What salaries they get I do not know. I did ask him if he could let me have a certain piece of information that it was necessary for me to procure in connection with certain other inquiries. He makes a certain machine, and I wanted to know what the cost of manufacturing that machine was at a certain stage of its manufacture. I was astounded and astonished, for he answered me that he kept no costings at all in his manufacture. He is a large manufacturer, employing a very great number of hands turning out a large number of machines every year, and he could not state what the cost at each stage was, or what the proportion of labour was in the finished product! He made a guess that inasmuch as he drew certain moneys from month to month for himself, and inasmuch as the actual profits were always sufficient to cover that, that his factory was yielding him a sufficient and handsome profit, and all further inquiries and costings methods were unnecessary. But the situation might at any moment change for him. If it did change for him he would not be able to track where in his process his business had failed. He would not be able to effect the economies that were necessary. Surely, it is obvious as a matter of common sense that any business that is being conducted in that way cannot be held to guarantee to any persons employed in it, either workmen or employers, a sufficient wage to keep them in decency and comfort. They should have it, but they cannot be guaranteed it. It is a remarkable fact that the two most prosperous industries in Ireland—two of the industries that are paying the kind of wages that are required or stipulated for in this resolution—are the two that are being conducted on a proper system of costings from beginning to end. I do think that Deputy Johnson has served a practical purpose in bringing this resolution forward, if only to draw attention to this very element in the working out of the social state that he desires.
If we care to have that state we will require to have efficient handling of business in Ireland. The agricultural industry, as well as every other form of industry, should be conducted in a modern scientific fashion, as is done elsewhere. Then it might be time to speak of guarantee. It is certainly impossible to speak of a guarantee now. Deputy Johnson said that the ideal expressed in the Resolution either in its original or amended form, is one that can be realised. I have stated that I believe it can be realised. If it is to be realised, not only must there be a certain aspiration of mind, but there must also be a certain ruthless efficiency of method, and that is not everywhere apparent. While it is not apparent, and while the machinery is not available in order that you might be able to estimate exactly how every given industry stands at a given moment, as can be done in large undertakings in other countries, we can go no further than the Resolution, as amended by the amendment put forward by the Assistant Minister for Industry and Commerce. I feel, therefore, that the amendment is necessary if the Resolution is to be made practicable. When I use the word practicable I do not use it in the sense that Deputy Johnson spoke of the use of that word, when he quoted Gradgrind. I am using it in another sense altogether. If life is to be properly conducted it must be efficiently conducted. Nothing that is inefficient can be said to be practicable. It is because an impossible demand was being made in the original form of the Resolution, and because the amendment moved by the Assistant Minister for Industry and Commerce has reduced it down to what can be adopted, and what may be held up as a possible and practicable ideal, that I will support the amendment, and will support the Resolution in that amended form.
It is evident that in the industrial community there are strongly held views amongst all parties about questions now brought forward touching wages and conditions of labour. These questions are of first importance to the whole country, and it is always to be deplored that they cannot be settled without stoppage of work. Sometimes it appears stoppage of work cannot be avoided, but of all times for a stoppage to occur it will be generally agreed that the time when the country is about to terminate an era of disturbance and to elect a new Government is the most unfortunate. We are at present suffering from a stoppage at the ports, the effect of which on the country's economic position is necessarily serious. On Friday the Minister for Industry and Commerce will endeavour to find a way out of the deadlock at the Conference between the parties, and I do not think it would be unreasonable for the Dáil to express the view, that the parties should come to that conference as men on whom a great responsibility rests, and who should not leave the Conference without having arrived at such an adjustment between their respective points of view as will recognise the genuine difficulties of both sides and the need for mutual concessions Besides the trouble at the ports there are rumours, in some cases more than rumours, of extensive industrial trouble. Questions may be involved that are not easily settled, but I would suggest that none of them can be of such extreme urgency as not to permit of a little longer time for their examination. I would suggest that the parties should consider whether a more fitting time to examine them will not present itself, when the period of disturbance we are just passing through has terminated, and when a new Dáil can apply itself to those social questions to which for some time it has not been possible to pay very much attention.
Amendment put and declared carried.
Motion, as amended, put and declared carried.
The Dáil adjourned at 8.25 p.m. until Thursday, 26th July, at 3 p.m.