Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 9 Jul 1924

Vol. 8 No. 8

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE. - ESTIMATES FOR PUBLIC SERVICES. VOTE 58—MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS.

MINISTER for EXTERNAL AFFAIRS (Mr. Fitzgerald)

I move:—

That a sum, not exceeding £34,999, be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1925, to pay the salaries, and expenses of the Ministry of External Affairs.

It will be seen that this Vote covers activities under three heads:—Head-quarters' External Affairs; Representatives abroad, and Publicity Department. It will be seen also that this Vote represents a considerable reduction on last year, particularly when you notice that it now includes sums of money which last year were put under the heading "Home Affairs" and "Public Works and Buildings."

Perhaps I had better say a few words, beginning with Publicity and ending with Headquarters' External Affairs. The Publicity Department has decreased its expenditure by, roughly, one-half. This work falls into two classes. One activity of it might be described as a Public Record Office. It is necessary for this Government, as for every other Government, to be informed as to what is happening in the world, what is being stated in the Press of the world, and in other periodical publications; and for that reason, instead of each Department in the Government having such a Record Office it is found more efficient and more economical to concentrate that matter in one office. The work there, then, is to note the Press and other publications of various countries in the world, and to call the attention of each Ministry to such information as may be likely to interest them, and to keep a record and to keep files of any cases of important publications, and to keep a general record of all such matters as may either now or at any time in the future be required to be referred to. Apart from that we require to have some machinery for conveying information or for rectifying misinformation. It must be remembered that practically every country does this; and most countries are much better situated for doing it than we are. To begin with, we are a new country and an unknown quantity in the world. Ireland is not only an unknown quantity in a neutral form, but in a negative form. We have a definitely anti-Irish Press, particularly in the greatest news distribution centre in the world, namely, London; and we have recognised the fact that for the sake of our commercial relations, and for the sake of our general good name in the world we do require not to be misled. Every country has such a Department, but other countries have an advantage that we have not got, and it is this: that the Press of other countries is usually supplied with a certain number of representatives in foreign countries; and the usual system is that the foreign representatives of newspapers who are away from their own country usually get in touch with the political representation in that country, and those journalists act as a channel for information and for correct information concerning their own country in the foreign countries in which they are living. Our Irish Press does not indulge in such a foreign news service. I think it has to be generally recognised that our Irish Press depends almost to an exclusive degree upon the London News Agencies. Therefore it is necessary to maintain this Department for some time to come at any rate.

In the early days of our existence this Department had another activity, namely, what we may call pro-State propaganda in this country. That was a very difficult situation to be faced with, because there was always the question as to whether the information which we put out could be considered as pro-State, or whether it might not be regarded as pro any one shade of opinion in the country. As far as I was concerned, I endeavoured, when we were doing such work, to confine the activities of that Department to the narrowest limits of pro-State propaganda; but I admit that there was very often considerable doubt as to where the pro-State began or ended and where the pro-Party began. Apart from that, there are certain forms of advertisements which every Government has to indulge in. For instance, during the last year we had to advertise the National Loan. The publicity work of that was done by this Department. We had also to conduct a certain amount of publicity work for recruitment for the army.

Now we come to the representatives abroad. You will see here that we have a certain number of representatives abroad. One office has been closed during the period of last year. It was closed owing to resignation and owing to the fact that at the time the resignation took place we were considering whether that office was well situated in Berlin or whether, with the view of promoting trade between Ireland and Germany, it would not be better situated in another city. The re-establishment of the German office is being considered by the Ministry of Industry and Commerce, and by our Ministry, but so far we have not re-established that office.

Generally speaking, these foreign offices must be considered as preparing the ground rather than doing anything particular, although they have succeeded in doing very good work. They procure and have procured a very considerable amount of valuable information concerning markets in districts for things produced in the Saorstát, and that information has led to a decided improvement in our exports to these countries. During the first four months of this year, approximately, the value of the direct exports from this country —I emphasise the word "direct"—to the United States of America was £87,549; to Belgium, £48,985; to France, £18,425; to Holland, £6,314. These representatives provide our manufacturers with information which has enabled them to procure materials from these countries at lower costs than might otherwise have been incurred. But, actually, the work of these representatives is to prepare the ground. It is very difficult to procure trade at the present moment owing to the instability of the foreign exchanges. I do not need to repeat again here that there is one big industry here; I will not mention the percentage it represents. It is certainly the overwhelming industry in this country.

There is that fact. And then we have the other fact, that we have not only one overwhelming industry, but we have practically only one market. For the future well-being of this country it is undoubtedly necessary that we should be looking round and endeavouring to find new markets for our goods and endeavouring to build up trade with a more general distribution than it has at present. I need only point out, or suggest to the imagination of Deputies, what would have been the position of this country, for instance, if foot-and-mouth disease took a serious hold here, or if that disease took such a serious hold in England as to cut off our cattle trade with England. There is no doubt about it that it is necessary for us to do what we can to explore possible new markets for our trade. These representatives abroad are doing that. They have succeeded to a certain extent, and I recognise myself that we cannot expect, for the time being, to build up any large new trade until such time as the world is generally more stabilished than it is at present.

Apart from that work, we have two offices in America. We have an office in Washington and an office in New York. I pointed out that we had a considerable trade with America. Most of our communications with America are with the city of New York. We have a large Irish population there, and, unfortunately, it has happened so far, and, I am afraid, it will continue for some time, that a large number of our people emigrate to the United States. We have considerable interests as a State, and our nationals have considerable interests in the United States. We have, therefore, as I say, two offices there. I calculate that within this next year our American representation will possibly be a source of revenue to the Government.

We have also taken a step which has not hitherto been taken by any State in the British Commonwealth, other than by Great Britain. That is to say, we have advanced to a large extent towards having a fully accredited Minister Plenipotentiary representing us in Washington. He is not actually established there, but the American Government have officially notified us that they will gladly receive a Minister Plenipotentiary from us. We have now gone to the next stage of asking them for what is known as the agrément for the individual. When that agrément is received the Minister Plenipotentiary will be established in Washington. That, as Deputies are aware, will be the first case of any State in the British Commonwealth, other than Great Britain, having a direct representative fully accredited. It is a tangible interpretation of the meaning of our present status. It means that we, as a sovereign State, speak directly to other sovereign States through our own fully-accredited Plenipotentiary.

From Monday next our office in New York shall issue visas to travellers coming from the port of New York whose first port on disembarkation will be in the Saorstát. It is impossible for me to say exactly what revenue that will mean, but when Deputies realise that the cost of a visa for each visitor is 10 dollars, roughly something like £2 5s., it is only a matter of multiplying £2 5s. by the number of people who will come direct from New York to see that the probability is that it will be a source of fairly considerable revenue, and, as I hope, will more than pay for the cost of our representation in America. Also during the last year we have begun to issue Irish passports, which will also be a source of revenue. We calculate we will make something from £10,000 to £12,000 in revenue out of passports.

The last year has seen a good deal of development with regard to this Department. After the signing of the Treaty, owing to the conditions of things here, it seemed almost inevitable that the status that we received under the Treaty must be diminished to some extent owing to our own internal trouble. At the present day that status is not diminished. If not enlarged, its ambit has been made clear. That is due to the fact that we have become members of the League of Nations; that the American Government has agreed to accept a Minister Plenipotentiary from us; that our people in travelling abroad now travel on Irish passports; that American citizens travelling to the Saorstát from Monday next shall get their visas from the Irish representative—the Irish visa—and a number of other things which possibly will transpire during the criticism of this Estimate.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

Can we speak on the general subject?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I think sub-head (A) gives sufficient opportunity for general questions, but if any question could be raised approximately under B. or C. it might be left over for these sub-heads.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

It is very hard to know whether a matter concerns headquarters or the representatives abroad.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Representatives abroad are certainly under (B).

Mr. HEFFERNAN

The subject I wish to refer to concerns both. However, you can stop me if I go beyond the rules of order. I want to refer to the question of agricultural information. I notice the Minister referred to agriculture indirectly, although he did not mention it by name. My idea is that the representatives abroad should devote more time and attention to the acquisition of agricultural information, and that the information acquired should be spread through this country in a way that will make it available to the ordinary man in the street. As far as I am aware— and I have probably an opportunity of being more closely in touch with the Minister than the average man in the street—we know practically nothing about what is happening abroad, or what information the Ministry is getting. In a State like this the attention of the Ministry should be given rather to economic, industrial and agricultural affairs than to questions of policy between nations. There are many matters. I would suggest to the Minister, on which information could be acquired, and handed down to those interested with beneficial results. There is the case of agricultural fertilizers. A considerable quantity of fertilizing material is imported into Ireland, and I find it is very difficult to get accurate information as to what foreign countries these materials can be secured from, and at what price they can be got. I think the Minister would be doing useful work if he would see that his representatives devoted some attention to that matter—for instance, the representative in Brussels.

The Minister referred to alternative markets for Irish produce, with special reference, I think, to agricultural produce. While I agree with the Minister that our main market is in Great Britain, and probably must remain in Great Britain, still I think it is important that alternative markets should be provided if possible, or that inquiries should be made and routes opened up. Special attention should be given to the question of a market in the United States. I believe there is the possibility of an alternative market there for agricultural produce, particularly for dairy produce. I would suggest that our representative there should get busy, obtain all the necessary information, and see that the information is conveyed to the people who are looking for it. I understand the Americans are also anxious to get Irish products of a certain type—cloths, linens, and many things of that kind—that the market is there and available if it is opened up. There is a great deal of wealth in the United States, and a great deal of money available for spending on luxuries and such things as cloths, linens, etc., which are beyond the ordinary purse. Possibly there is a big market there for Irish produce if it were opened up.

Mr. P. HOGAN (Clare)

The matter I want to raise I think comes under the sub-head A (1). It more or less concerns the question of policy and therefore would come under the Minister's salary. I want to refer to the fact that we have been told on all possible occasions, and some impossible occasions, that we are co-equal partners in the British Commonwealth of Nations. To my mind a privilege of that kind connotes responsibility, and if we are partners in the privilege, doubtful though that be, of belonging to the British Commonwealth, do we share in the responsibility of that Commonwealth in the course of its dealing with other nations? What is our responsibility for the dragooning of India and Egypt? If we have the privilege of belonging to the Commonwealth of Nations which at present is dragooning India and Egypt are we responsible for that dragooning? What is our share of the responsibility? Have we protested, or are we in a position to protest? During our struggle here it was common talk that the self-governing colonies, Canada, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand, did not make their protest when this country was being dragooned. Now we are in a similar position to these Dominions, or whatever their proper title is, and we are standing idly by while other places are being dragooned into subjection. It is a well known fact that the roads of India are swept at night by cavalry with nets drawn between them for the capture of alleged rebels. Has anything been said about that at any of these conferences? I read about two months ago in an obscure corner of that paragon of excellence, "The Daily Mail," that there were three executions in India for complicity in a riot. I do not know what the "Daily Mail" calls a riot, but when reading that obscure paragraph I could not help remembering that I read some time in summer of 1921, in a similar obscure corner of that paper, that two men were executed in Mitchelstown for complicity in a riot. I could not help asking myself if the riot in India had the same complexion as the riot in Mitchelstown, and whether India is in the same position to-day as we were in 1921, and also whether this Free State is in any way responsible, and whether the privilege of belonging to the British Commonwealth connotes responsibility for the acts which the step-mother country across the water is doing in India and Egypt. Going round Dublin one is struck by the way the representatives of the different foreign countries exhibit the one great badge of their nationality, namely, their language. How do we stand in foreign countries in regard to that, and have our representatives there that qualification? Is it as clear to the foreigners that we possess that one great badge of nationality, and is it emblazoned as clearly as the representatives of other countries blazon their badge here? I hope that the Minister will give us the reply to these points which they deserve, and tell us whether our responsibility to the British Commonwealth connotes responsibility for the Commonwealth's action, and also whether our representatives abroad display the badge of our distinctive nationality before the world.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

The main matter that would arise in this Vote would arise under two ordinary heads, one dealing with what I may call chancery work, and the other dealing with consular work. I do not know whether this form of taking the Estimates enables one to cover both, but I take it that your ruling is, that discussion under (A) would enable both these matters to be covered. I notice that the Minister, in his introductory statement, I think not altogether wisely, avoided that close, detailed exposition of his Vote, of which such an excellent example was given by the Minister for Justice when presenting the two Votes connected with his Department. I think he could, with advantage, have adopted that course. He dealt with one section, that which I have called the consular work, but he clearly avoided in his opening comments any reference to the chancery work of his Department, which I take to be not less important than the other, and which many would hold to be of even greater importance than the other. Under that definition I am referring to the activities of his Department in so far as they define our relations with outside nations, external affairs in regard to politics, as distinct from external affairs in regard to trade. The question asked already by Deputy Hogan touched upon that, and we know that powers lie in his Department to make it perfectly clear that the status achieved under the Treaty is one of very considerable importance, and would give us as large expression of our desires to let our will be known abroad in regard to important matters, as any other status given before in practical politics in the last few years. If the Department of what is called External Affairs were properly executed it might become one of the most forcible Departments for our internal affairs. Deputy Hogan asks how we stood in regard to the other parts of this Commonwealth where things are being done, the kind and colour of which we have had intimate experience with in the immediate past. I would like the Minister to have stated here quite clearly what I take to be the truth, and that is, that our commitments extend no further than they are stated to be in this House, that if any acts are done or commitments are made by any member of the Commonwealth they do not affect this member of the Commonwealth, except in so far as we express our endorsement of them. This morning I received a copy of the debates of the House of Commons of Canada. The whole debate there is concerned with the Estimates of the Ministry of Home Affairs, and it constitutes a very long document containing very important matters. The House will be relieved to hear that I had an opportunity of only reading the first few pages, otherwise my excerpts from it would be more numberous.

Major BRYAN COOPER

Could the Minister not move to report progress to allow Deputy Figgis to read this document?

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

I am glad that the Deputy put forward that. I intended to do so myself at an earlier stage in deference to Deputy Cooper as well as other Deputies. I would like to read one or two statements from this document. The Premier, Mr. Mackenzie King, states in regard to the Lausanne Treaty: "We have never at any time understood that Lord Curzon"—let me substitute for the words "Lord Curzon" the words "British Foreign Secretary" and then the meaning of this question will become evident. "We have never at any time understood that the British Foreign Secretary in any sense of the word was representing this Dominion and, as I have already said, we had very special grounds for knowing that, so far as the Dominions were concerned they were not being represented at Lausanne." I will read another quotation from another part of the Premier's speech. "Were we to hold the view that a Minister at London, without any conference with, or the consent of the Dominion of Canada, without being in any way a representative of Canada in connection with the proceedings of a conference which he might attend, could bind this country, then we would enjoy simply a Colonial status, but if, on the other hand, we take as we do the position the Government took in this matter, and, as Sir Robert Borden has taken, that since the war there has been a fuller recognition of the rights of the Dominion, namely, that there is equality of status between the self-governing Dominions and the British Government in matters which are of like concern to all, then there is a getting away from the Colonial status into a status of partnership within the Empire, which is an entirely different thing." If that is an accurate statement of the state of affairs in regard to Canada, much more forcibly are those words to be applied to this member of the Commonwealth which did not grow up into Dominion status, but which started by being a nation, and which is now still a nation, with this addition, that the recognition of its independence has been attained. I emphasise these things here, because of a question I put at an earlier stage in to-day's business, in which I asked the Minister if he had received any invitation to be present at a conference in which nations in Europe are to be represented, and where important matters are to be discussed of the greatest moment to the peace of Europe. The Minister replied that he did not receive any such invitation, and that there were to be discussions on Friday of this week at which the High Commissioner in London of this State will be present. I think the Ministry should take this opportunity, or a very early opportunity, to make it clear that if in these proposed conversations that are about to occur there are matters coming under discussion that may lead to treaties or protocols in which the assent of this State may be required, that this State at a later date will take the view that it has no concern in these matters, not having been present by its representative in the discussions from the very first day they started. That is a point of view taken by Premier Mackenzie King.

Canada has asserted that point of view as a British Dominion having grown into that status, and if it is a right point of view for a Dominion, having once been a colony, it must be much more true of a country that is now a nation within the fullest meaning of the word. That is one aspect of the Vote to which I desire to draw attention, and I had expected that the Minister would have taken the opportunity, when presenting this Vote, to have made such a statement in respect of this State on these matters as was made by the Canadian Prime Minister in the Ottawa House of Commons. The other aspect of the question refers, not to the chancery relations but to the consular arrangements, not the arrangements and relations of this country with other countries in matters affecting its political position and its consequences, but directly as between this country's trade and other countries' trade. I think the Minister has made it clear that he is altogether satisfied with the progress made in these matters. I do not think he has good reason to be satisfied with that progress. The last figures published for April of the trade and shipping statis tics show that our export to other countries is a very small matter indeed, hardly amounting to much more than about five per cent. of the whole of our import trade. That is a state of affairs which ought to be rectified, and which could be rectified. The Minister stated that the greater part of our industry consisted of the manufacture of one product. That one product is not very largely taken by any other country than Great Britain. Its consumption in other countries is apparently not encouraged. The form in which these trade and shipping statistics are published, month by month, only enforces the facts that they do go to prove whether these various representatives that have been established in other countries are or are not proving their worth. In regard to the first matter I mentioned, our political relations, we could never estimate the value received in terms of hard cash in that connection. I think any expenditure incurred for the establishment of political relations of an independent or semi-independent sort with other nations is expenditure very well incurred indeed.

When you leave that and come down to these other offices, the office at New York, the office at Brussels, the office at Rotterdam, what we do want to know, and what it is right that the Minister should inform us, is by checking over the figures in the statistics of trade and shipping it is very easy to discover how far these offices established in these various countries, with which we are doing practically no business, have justified their existence, and if they do not justify their existence in a case of that kind, where there is no national dignity concerned, where it is purely a matter of business, then it is good business to consider the cutting off of such representatives or their transfer to somewhere else, where good business can be proved in the usual terms of good business. I want to make it quite clear in bringing forward that argument that I am only dealing with persons whose work as consuls must be justified by the return of business. I am not dealing with any Ministers Plenipotentiary who may be established in any capitals where the same business could not be brought forward. Finally, in regard to publicity—

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I think it is better to deal with publicity separately.

General MULCAHY

Under Sub-head A 4 there is £750 estimated for the cost of entertaining distinguished foreigners. I would like to hear some general particulars from the Minister as to what is his Department's outlook on that particular type of matter. Some weeks ago the Premier of Queens-land, I think, was here for a day or two, and I have a slight suspicion that if he found out the Ministry of External Affairs at all he found it out by chance. I have a slight suspicion, too, that he and his wife hired a motor car and went off by themselves to visit Glendalough. I am not quite sure if that is so, but I have very strong suspicions that it is so. I do feel, until things generally get more established here, that it is the very peculiar responsibility of the Ministry of External Affairs to see that visitors of a type like that, who come to Ireland, are looked after, and that the hospitality of the State is shown to them in the way, I am sure, every Deputy here would like that it would be. £750 is a very small margin, I think, considering the stage of development that we have arrived at at the present time, and that a larger amount of this type of entertainment would fall on a purely State Department at present than might under circumstances that might obtain in three or four or five years' time.

Under sub-head (b) I feel that there is somewhat of the same stinginess in regard to our establishments abroad. I see no elasticity provided for in any, way for what I will roughly call entertaining. If we are having representatives of this country abroad it is not in accordance with the dignity that we would like to have associated with our country that they should be tied down to so many shillings a week or so many pounds a year, a typist, a secretary and a messenger. I think, too, that a more systematic explanation is desirable than the Minister has given us as to why, particularly, Geneva, Brussels, Rotterdam, Paris and Chili should have fallen on to the map of the world, from the Irish point of view, in the way that is suggested here, and why only these places should have turned up in such an unexpected way. The third point is, the explanation with regard to our discontinuing the office in Berlin, I think must be regarded as most unsatisfactory. Personally, I feel that if there is any country where a consul would be of use to us at the present time, Germany stands out above any other country. It has been a big industrial country; its industrial fabric has to a large extent been shattered. There must be many persons and many ideas to be got in touch with in Germany that would be of the greatest possible assistance to us in setting about the organisation of our industrial State here. There is a certain amount of promise and hope in the statement of the Minister that this matter is receiving the special consideration of the Minister for Industry and Commerce. But there is very little time to be lost, I feel, and even the hope that is held out to us for the future, I hope for the immediate future, does not satisfactorily explain why, having had a Consul established in Berlin, because some one man resigned we should shut down our Consulate and clear out.

Mr. WHITE

With regard to this item for official entertainment, I would like the Minister to give us a little more information as to what it means. Does it mean that an open house is kept where we have a Consul or agency, where food and drink are served ad lib to everyone that calls? £750 is a large item under the heading of "official entertainment," especially in view of the present condition of affairs in Galway, Mayo, Donegal, Kerry, and other parts of the country, where people are eating Indian meal stirabout. £750 is estimated for 1924-25, while the sum for 1923-24 was £150. That is an increase of £600 under the heading of "official entertainment." The Minister should be in a position to give the House detailed information as to how this £750 is to be spent and where it is to be spent.

Major COOPER

I would associate myself with Deputy Mulcahy and Deputy White in wishing for a little more information about this official entertainment. I assume that the increase of 500 per cent. to which Deputy White refers, is due to the Tailteann Games. The Minister is taking time by the forelock. He realises that we shall have to fulfil our reputation for hospitality and he has been hoarding money until it is needed. White I have a slight idea of what is being done, and that it is desirable, I would like to be reassured on one point. I have been informed that some of this money is spent on entertaining the representative of foreign Powers at the annual St. Patrick's Day banquet. If so, I think that the St. Patrick's Day banquet should not be associated with a Party organisation. If it is an official banquet, at which foreign Powers are represented, all parties should take part in it.

I turn from that to the question of our representatives abroad. I should like to know from the Minister if there is any particular scale on which their remuneration is fixed, because it varies very much, and it does not always seem to vary in accordance with fixed principles. Our representative at Washington, who will now, I suppose, be a Minister Plenipotentiary, receives £2,370. He also gets £475 for a house. That is, he gets over £2,800, or £300 more than the President. The representative in New York gets £1,800, £50 more than a Minister. I have no doubt the Minister will account for these rather large salaries by telling us, as is quite true, that the cost of living in the United States is very high and, as Deputy Milroy is not here, he may add it is due to Protection. How does that principle work out with regard to other places? For instance, we pay our representative in Brussels on a higher scale than our representative in Paris. I have always understood that the cost of living is lower in Brussels than in Paris, relatively speaking, and, most certainly, the rate of exchange is more favourable to us in Belgium than in France. The representative in Brussels gets £750 and the French representative gets only £700. The Brussels assistant gets £550, and there is no assistant in France, only a clerk who gets £250. It seems to me there is no system in arranging these things. I hope the Minister will be able to indicate the principle on which this remuneration is fixed. We may, of course, hold that it is due to the volume of our trade; that our export trade to Belgium is bigger than our export trade to France. That is so, on the latest figures of the Ministry of Industry and Commerce. But our trade to Belgium is very largely a trade in raw materials, which ought to be made up here, instead of being exported to provide labour elsewhere. There is one remarkable item; we sent over £1,000 worth of waste paper to each of these countries in four months. I suppose these are resolutions passed by district councils. We should probably be able to promote an export trade in that matter. The figures for Belgium show a sum of £28,000 for horses. We ought to have a good export trade in horses, but I think the horses that we export ought to have an average value of more than £15.

A DEPUTY

Dead horses.

Major COOPER

They are not dead horses. I believe they are exported alive, but I agree that they are exported for meat. They are not exported to keep up the credit of Irish blood stock, but to improve the flavour of the Belgian sausage. That is the principal item of trade with Belgium, and without that our trade with Belgium is worse than our trade with France. We seem to be doing better in places where we have no trade representatives than where we have them. The Straits Settlements take more than Holland. I would like to call attention to sub-heads, rents, fuel, light, and cleaning. There seems to be an enormous reduction there, but the reduction must have been due to the fact that the original figures were fixed without any regard to economy at all. The idea that the High Commissioner's office would cost £13,000, which was the figure in last year's Estimate, for rent, fuel, light and cleaning is absurd. The reduction to £4,680 for 1924-25 is not due to economy, but to the preposterous figure put down in the Estimates last year. I hope the Minister will tell us whether these amounts were spent or not. General Mulcahy referred to Chile. We appear to have an honorary representative in Chile. He has no salary, but in the Estimates he has small sums for rent, travelling, postage, stationery, newspapers, and so on.

They are not very large sums; altogether they do not come to £100, but is there any necessity for them at all? Does this honorary representative perform any useful function? Is he performing what Deputy Figgis called a chancery function, or is he performing a political or trade function? If he performs a trade function both in export and import, Chile is an also ran, and it appears with Hong Kong, Irak, and the Falkland Islands. I do not think the Minister has explained that an honorary representative justifies even these small sums unless he is fulfilling a useful purpose. If we want to have our influence felt in the Southern Hemisphere we ought to have a representative in the West Indies. There we have a satisfactory trade.

Mr. WHITE

What about Mexico?

Major COOPER

Mexico is an also ran. I hope the Chairman will not pull me up when I use the word "publicity." I am not referring to the Publicity Department of the Ministry here; I am referring to the publicity work performed by those representatives abroad. To what extent do they correct misrepresentations and innuendoes about the position of the Saorstát and the doings here, and so on? It is common knowledge that many of the foreign journalists are grossly misinformed. We saw yesterday where a telegram from Brussels appeared in the Press stating that a memorial had been unveiled in memory of the Ulster soldiers. As a matter of fact, the Minister knows the memorial was raised in memory of Munster soldiers, and was unveiled by a member of the Seanad, and the only paper that has had intelligence to correct that was a Belfast newspaper which said that the memorial must be to the Munsters. Surely our representative at Brussels should have informed the journalist that this was a pilgrimage of 200 Irishmen who fought side by side with the French in Belgium, and had revisited the battlefields to honour the dead. It would help to dispel the impression that prevails in England and in the Continent of Europe that all the fighting was done by Ulster. Our representative apparently had not informed the Press in any way so that they could get an accurate knowledge of the facts. I read the Continental Press occasionally, and I see no evidence of any publicity work done by our representatives at all.

I hope the Minister will remind them that that is the one direction in which they can give value for the money voted for them, which though not enormous, is rather more than we can afford. I emphasise that fact because there are constant rumours of an increase in the number of foreign representatives and of starting new missions in fresh places. Without prejudice to the question of Berlin, I think it would be a great mistake to support new representatives in other places unless we are absolutely certain we are going to get value for the money in an extension of trade. We have to look at this matter, not in a sentimental, but in a practical spirit. I hope the Minister would be able to re-assure those who are afraid that we are going to launch out in a matter of this kind while we have an unbalanced budget and an almost empty exchequer.

Mr. JOHNSON

I protest against the suggestion that in a matter of representation abroad consideration should be given only to an extension of trade. I take it that the majority of the Deputies believe that the position Ireland has attained is one which would enable us, in however small a degree, to take a place in forming international opinion, and in influencing, in however small a degree, the trend of national affairs.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

Deputy Johnson appears to be quoting some words like those I used, but he certainly is not quoting what I said. I said distinctly in regard to that branch to which he is now referring, that almost no expense would be too great. I did say when it is dealing with business, and the question of consuls for that purpose, that the business test was the only test to adopt.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Deputy Johnson made no allusion to Deputy Figgis at all.

Mr. JOHNSON

It is very kind of Deputy Figgis to take it that I was referring to him. I had no notion of what he said in this matter, and I am very sorry that I appear to have been misrepresenting him. The view I have, and I think it is the view of the majority in the Dáil, is that we have entered into the community of nations— not the British Community of Nations —in the hope of playing at least our little part in the formation of world opinion in regard to human progress. I think that it is not in keeping with that idea, or the idea of Ireland a nation, that we should discuss the question of increased representation abroad merely from the point of view of whether it is going to add to the trading facilities, or to the probability of trading in those particular countries. I do not regret to hear that there are rumours which I have not heard before, but I am glad to hear there are rumours, and I hope they are well founded, that there are proposals on foot to have representatives in other capitals. I would suggest to the Ministry that they should look to small European nations, particularly Northern nations—Sweden, Finland, Denmark; and Norway—and endeavour to have representation there. It would help to keep this country well-informed on the development in matters industrial and agricultural, and everything else that would be of help, and in addition, to keep in touch with political opinion there. One of the trends of thought in the last year or two has been in favour of the union, or, shall I say, the fraternity, of the small nations for the purpose of safeguarding the interests of small nations against possible combinations of the Great Powers. I think it would be well if our views changed towards associating with that idea, not necessarily in conflict with any of the greater Powers, but rather to show that there was a community of interest, and a desire which should be put into practical effect if necessary, for the continuity of peace and progress on the part of the small nations. I suggest that it is quite worthy of the ideals of human development internationally that we should associate ourselves, and be clearly associated, with those small nations of Europe and the world in general. We have recently heard of one of the small nations proposing disarmament. That is a very good beginning; it is probably a kind of gesture, to use a common word, that may extend its influence over very wide areas. We have met for the last two or three years in international conference in Geneva. I think it has been shown in regard to the international Labour Conference that there is a clear and sympathetic bond between the representatives of the small nations and Ireland, and I believe that it would be beneficial that we should take steps to strengthen that bond, and let those people feel that there was a direct intercourse between representatives of Ireland in those countries and the publicists of those countries. The ulterior benefits, I think, of that fraternity would be considerable, but I am not pressing this idea forward with a view to the material benefits. I believe that they would be secondary but that they would be substantial. And when one learns from Deputy Heffernan how far from perfection we are in regard to our knowledge of affairs—agricultural, cooperative, and the like—in these countries, that is an added reason why we should be in the way of a constant stream of information from these countries in regard to these developments.

Then again I think we ought to have a representative in Ottawa and perhaps also one in Capetown. But certainly we ought to have one in Ottawa. We are bound in many ways to keep ourselves informed of the state of opinion in that city and it seems to me to be very obvious that we could have a representative there. The Minister did say some little time ago that the matter was under consideration. I was hopeful that he would have been able to tell us that that consideration had resulted in a decision, that decision being to have a representative appointed in Ottowa. Deputy Bryan Cooper again has gone. He could not help saying that the increased cost of the maintenance of representatives in America, in the United States, is no doubt due to Protection. He would perhaps, if he were here, be able to tell us whether the expected influx of visitors to Ireland from that country—the influx of men and women who are able to come and spend months in Europe out of their earnings and savings in America, was also due to Protection.

There is another matter of more delicacy and difficulty perhaps, but a matter of great importance about which I would like to have heard something from the Minister. He may think it judicious not to say much. When Deputy Cooper suggested that the representatives of Ireland abroad should be in a position to place Ireland's point of view of policy in international matters before the public of those countries one was tempted to ask: What is Ireland's policy? What is the position held by the Irish Government in regard to the Irish attitude in international affairs? The question has been raised as to the Conference of the Allied Nations, the Nations which were allied during the War in regard to German Reparations; and the Minister has said that the Government has been invited to be represented at a preliminary Conference to be held in London, that it is possible, that it is likely that that invitation will be accepted, and that the High Commissioner will represent this country at that preliminary Conference. Now there is the question as to whether we ought not to take advantage of the closeness of Dublin to London and if we are going to be represented at such a Conference of the Nations forming the British Commonwealth, whether we should not be represented at such a Conference by the Minister responsible as well as by the High Commissioner. If this were done, it is suggested, I think with some force, that these other nations—Canada, Australia, and South Africa—might be inclined to take advantage of the fact that our Minister for External Affairs is able to be there with the strength of his position as responsible Minister, and that the Commissioners who will be also present representing these other countries would be able to collaborate with our Minister who is in a stronger position because of his higher status, and that that might be a very good method of taking advantage of our contiguity to London.

But in connection with the immediate matter under consideration at the coming Conference where do we stand? What attitude does the Government take in regard to the responsibilities arising out of the European War? It is proposed that we shall accept the invitation to attend the preliminary Conference of the Nations forming the British Commonwealth. Can the Minister indicate whether it is proposed to accept the invitation to attend the Inter-Allied Conference or whether it is proposed to intimate that we do not feel ourselves inclined to take any responsibilities in regard to European complications? I do not want to probe this matter too closely. I realise that it is a matter requiring a great deal of care and consideration. But I want to urge that until there has been some public discussion, until there has been a well-understood decision taken by this country, that there should be no commitments. And before the Vote is passed I should like that we should have from the Ministry some indication at least of their attitude towards these very grave international matters closely associated with the possibilities of future war and, of course, very closely associated with and bound up with the possibilities of a revival of European prosperity. I do not think that our Government ought to be represented at any conference of the kind unless something has been stated on behalf of the Government of this country to indicate their attitude in these matters. If that is done we can see to what extent it may be said that the Government is representing Irish opinion, and how far their policy in these matters is likely to commend itself and—may I say— be persisted in from one year to another.

I do not know whether I may touch upon a matter which was suggested, I think, in the Seanad some months ago as to the possibilities of having a Committee representative of the Oireachtas as a whole to confer with the Minister for External Affairs in respect to international relationships. I do not know whether the Minister has any views on that question. I think he was entirely non-committal in the Seanad and I think no opportunity has been given him in the Dáil to express his views upon that question. But it seems to me to be worthy of consideration, particularly in connection with such a matter as this Inter-Allied Conference, that responsible public opinion in this country should be ascertained before any commitments of any kind are entered into.

Mr. MacBRIDE

I also should like to have some information from the Minister. I find here, that roughly speaking there is £21,000 spent in the maintenance of representatives abroad —Consuls abroad. I should like to know whether these Consuls do £21,000 worth of good. Did they perform the ordinary functions performed by Consuls, that is, issue Consular Reports at stated intervals? And if so, where can these Consular Reports be found? I am quite in agreement with Deputy Mulcahy when he says that a Consul should be maintained in Germany. But I do not think Berlin is the proper place; I think the Consul ought to be at Hamburg. I should like to be assured of the influence that the Irish race in America have in the policy of the United States. That is where influence counts. I do not think they have any influence at all. Or if they have any, I think it is very little. I am aware that when I say this I am speaking heretically. But that is my opinion. We are going to have a Minister at Washington. A Minister cannot be maintained at Washington for £2,370. That is out of the question. If you are going to send a Minister to Washington you must provide him with funds sufficient to uphold the dignity of this country, and you must give him an adequate salary. And £2,370 is nothing at all.

I am not all all so confident of the good the League of Nations is going to promote. I have no faith in the League of Nations. The League of Nations has turned out to consist of three nations, and when you turn on another screw one nation is paramount, its influence and its opinions are paramount, and its ideas are carried through when it wishes to carry them through. Consuls are simply trade agents, and they ought to do their best to extend the trade of the country. Thinking over those trade statistics that Deputy Bryan Cooper read out, I wish to be assured that all that trade, or the greater portion of that trade, does not go through England. How much of it is carried in bottoms, Irish or otherwise, from Ireland direct to any of those nations? Very little. I have answered my own question. There is one thing of which I must assure the Minister, and that is, my admiration of the adroitness with which he has proceeded to dig in this Ministry. The great majority of the members of the Dáil were quite opposed to the establishment of this Ministry; and the Minister has given proof of his ability to fill the position that he does fill by the excellent manner in which he has dug in the Ministry, so that it will be impossible to rout them out for another year or two.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

With regard to the cost of a visa for emigrants leaving Ireland for the United States, I presume the cost of the passports here is extra. I think the Minister said that the cost of the visa in the United States was £2 5s. I presume the cost here is about the same and that the cost of the passport is additional. There is complaint about that, as the cost is very hard on the emigrants. It adds a considerable amount to the sum which they have to pay for their passage and other things. I would suggest to the Minister that some arrangement should be made whereby the cost could be lowered. There is another matter which I wish to raise but which hardly comes under this Vote. It is with regard to the representation of labour at the International Labour Organisation, and I wish to refer to the suggested representation on the agricultural organisation.

Mr. FITZGERALD

I think that would come under the Vote of the Ministry of Lands and Agriculture, as the labour representation came under the Ministry of Industry and Commerce.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

It does not come under the Vote of the Ministry of Industry and Commerce. It comes under the League of Nations Vote.

Mr. FITZGERALD

It is the Ministry of Industry and Commerce part of the League of Nations Vote.

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

It cannot be raised on this Vote.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

Could I not raise the question of representation of agriculture at the Institute of Agriculture Conference on this Vote, as that would be arranged through the Minister for External Affairs, I presume?

Mr. FITZGERALD

It is not on my Vote.

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

There is a League of Nations Vote to be taken.

Mr. ESMONDE

Is it not a fact that this department was responsible for the representation of this State at the International Agricultural Institute Conference in Rome this year?

Mr. JOHNSON

Is it not competent for any Deputy to point out this as a matter of defection on the part of the Ministry?

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

Yes, as to the policy of the Ministry.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

That is how I wish to refer to it. I only referred to the labour representation as an example of what might be done for agriculture. I have no objection to the labour representation at the International Labour Conference. But I understand that the Institute of Agriculture meets this year in Rome. It met last year also, but as far as I know organised agriculture was not represented. I would suggest, in view of the importance of agriculture in this country, and the importance of this conference, that it is only right that agriculture should be represented at any international conference of this kind. As the question of general policy, Deputy McBride, I think, suggested that the Ministry of External Affairs is not necessary at all. I raised that matter at a previous stage, but I do not intend to raise it now for a personal reason. Knowing that the President has very many other preoccupations, I could not suggest, at this stage of the affairs of the nation, that he should take over the Ministry.

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

It would not be in order to raise it in any case.

Mr. HEWAT

I rise with a good deal of diffidence to speak in connection with matters that have been raised on this Vote. A question has been raised as to the value of the Ministry of External Affairs. We must, I think, recognise and appreciate that Rome was not built in a day, and that the period since self-government was established has been very short to enable people to formulate their ideas in connection with the development of the country. Deputy Johnson has raised the question of extending the Consular system to small nations and other countries. Personally I think that would be very desirable, but it is a question of gradual growth rather than of plunging into a large expenditure without a clear idea as to what value you are going to get for your money. It must be recognised that in the past there has been a close and intimate connection, both in trade and in every other respect, with our sister country, and that this departure which has been made under the auspices of the Ministry of External Affairs, is one that under the present order of things, must be fostered. In the past there has been rather a feeling that we could very suddenly jump to the end of things without going through the ordinary growth that is necessary both in connection with human beings and with business.

We are rather inclined to be impatient of the baby stage. We are rather inclined to run before we have learned to walk. That is rather a dangerous frame of mind in which to approach important questions such as the development of trade or the operations of the Ministry of External Affairs. It is quite noticeable that the change has been in operation. To-day, in the port of Dublin, overseas shipping is of increasing importance, and cross-Channel trade, as far as imports are concerned, is less important now than it was some years ago. Any idea formulated in the minds of people that we can do without the British markets for our produce, or that we can get other markets equally as good, is an argument that, I think, the Minister for Lands and Agriculture will not be very favourably impressed with.

On the general question of the appointment of representatives, I think that we should recognise the aspiration of all these countries politically. Nowadays the political outlook is very much bound up with the trade outlook, and, if I might say so, these international conferences are gatherings at which the representatives of every individual country have one centralised idea. It is not the community of nations; it is rather the defensive operation of looking after themselves. That is quite good. Humanly speaking, every man looks after himself. We see that in the Dáil and in various other places. We see it in all organisations. People are not out to help somebody else. They are there primarily to help themselves. That very thing that makes organisation so vocal in this country is more pronounced even when you come to international affairs.

Mr. JOHNSON

I would be glad if the Deputy would enlarge upon that and tell us what he means by being here to help ourselves.

Mr. HEWAT

I am sure Deputy Johnson will not read into my words anything of a personal nature. Deputy Johnson is here as a leader of a political organisation. Does he question what the policy of that organisation is? There is nothing discreditable in it. Is not the object of Deputies on the Labour Benches to improve the conditions of the working classes?

Mr. JOHNSON

That is clear. But the Deputy said that we were here to help ourselves, and that is why I wanted to give him an opportunity of correcting himself.

Mr. HEWAT

That was used in the collective sense. There is, however, I fancy, a personal ambition in everybody in the Dáil. As to the different organisations in the Dáil, I think the Government organisation is there for the purpose of governing the country as long as it is allowed.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

May I ask what Vote we are discussing?

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

The Deputy is only on a point of explanation.

Mr. HEWAT

That is so.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

What Vote was he discussing before he began his explanation?

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

Vote 58.

Mr. HEWAT

I would be very glad to sit down and leave Deputy O'Sullivan in possession, because even on this subject I think he can extend the scope of the argument that I have been trying to develop much better than I could myself. Looking at the Vote as a whole, the amount that the Minister wants for the Ministry this year shows a decrease of £24,814, and looking at the total amount spent one must keep in mind the present position of the country and what it can afford to pay. I say that at present, and without any desire to curtail the reasonable expenditure in the direction of the expansion of the representations of this country in other countries, with income tax and other charges as they are, the extension of the payment beyond the amount put down by the Minister for the present year would be unwise. At the same time I am not wishing to curtail the opportunities of the extension of the influence of this country by any niggardliness so far as this particular Ministry is concerned. What I do say is, that if the Minister and the Ministry can help to get us out of our insular ideas and broaden the outlook of the country as regards foreign relations, they will be doing a good work and a work that will benefit the future of the country in every way.

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

The next sub-head is sub-head C.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

Would it not be more convenient for the Minister to reply to sub-heads A and B, as sub-head C deals with different matters?

Mr. FITZGERALD

I think it would be better if I spoke on the two sub-heads with which we have been deal-in. In my opening statement I only wanted to speak about matters in the Estimate which people might misunderstand. I did not really mean it to be a general statement on the policy or work of the department. Deputy Heffernan, in his first statement, asked about getting agricultural information from foreign countries. We have got together a great deal of information on all aspects of agriculture from foreign countries, particularly with regard to certain northern countries, which we have in many cases translated and passed on to the Department of Agriculture, which I believe was very satisfied with the value and volume of the information we got.

In any definite matter, such as the best place to get visas, and so on, such matters can be raised with our representatives or with the Department of Agriculture or with my own Department. Deputy Hogan, I think it was, who asked about our responsibilities for what he called the work, or the misdeeds, of the British Commonwealth. He spoke about India and Egypt. The British Commonwealth of Nations is composed of various constituent members. One is Great Britain, another Canada, another Ireland. The Deputy may remember that some time ago Deputy Johnson asked a question about the phrase "British Empire," which was used with regard to some matter in connection with the League of Nations. I explained that the word "British Empire" in that instance referred to that part of the Commonwealth which was not Canada, South Africa, Ireland, New Zealand or Australia. We have no responsibility whatever for any act done by the British Government or by any other individual member of the British Community of Nations. I am perfectly clear about that. There is, however, what is known as the Indian Government, and I cannot say how far the acts done in India, whether good or bad, are the responsibilities of what is known as the Indian Government or of the British Government. They may be the responsibilities of one or of both, but there is no responsibility on any other member of the British Community of Nations.

Mr. HOGAN

Are we entitled to protest if we consider that these are misdeeds?

Mr. FITZGERALD

We have as much right to protest about these deeds, or misdeeds, as we would have to protest about deeds, or misdeeds, which Japan, for instance, might do in Korea.

Major BRYAN COOPER

Will the Minister, before protesting, obtain a more reliable statement than one appearing in the "Daily Mail"?

Mr. FITZGERALD

Oh, yes. In the Imperial Conference the Indian representatives laboured under great grievances about the treatment of their people in other parts of the British Commonwealth outside India. It seems to me to be perfectly ridiculous for them to bring such matters before the Imperial Conference, because that Conference had no power to dictate to any members of the British Community of Nations as to what they should or should not do within the territory of their own jurisdiction.

We can protest and pass resolutions if we like about what is being done in India or other places, but we have just as much right to dictate to the English Government as to what they do in India or in England as they have to dictate to us about what we do in our own country. The Deputy also said that he heard foreign representatives in Dublin speaking their own language. Some of them, of course, do, but I do not think that the Deputy has often heard the Dutch Consul speaking Dutch for the reason that very few people here are able to speak Dutch. Some of our representatives abroad speak and read Irish quite well, and some do not. We naturally attempt to get men who fulfil a whole different variety of qualifications. For these posts it requires a certain concatenation of qualities in one person. You want a man able to speak the language of the country he represents. He must have some knowledge of business and trade. You want him to have a good knowledge of the general situation in Ireland. You want him to have an Irish outlook. You want him to have a good presentation and a certain level of culture.

Mr. HOGAN

Would the Minister say that the representative for Holland here would be appointed here if he had not a knowledge of Dutch?

Mr. FITZGERALD

Quite possibly, yes. In the case of consular agents, it often happens that they do not speak the language of the country they represent. For instance, Czecho-Slovakia has appointed a consular agent in Dublin and he is, I understand, a Dublin business man. The Czecho-Slovakian Government would certainly have a very limited number of people to choose from if they had stipulated that their representative must be a Czech or a Slovak.

Mr. JOHNSON

With a knowledge of Irish?

Mr. FITZGERALD

Yes. Deputy Figgis asked about the activities of this Department so far as they go to define our status. He wished to be assured that no commitments were entered into which extended any further than those stated in this House. That is a thing upon which I feel as strongly as any other Deputy. So far as my Ministry is concerned, we cannot undertake any real commitments without submitting them to this House. We cannot append our name to anything, or ratify anything, without notifying this House. That is the general line by which I guide myself.

Mr. ESMONDE

Will the Minister state whether any arrangement was arrived at with Czecho-Slovakia or Finland last year by the Irish Government?

Mr. FITZGERALD

Not by my Department, so far as I remember.

Mr. ESMONDE

By the Irish Government?

Mr. FITZGERALD

I was speaking about my Department.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

Does the Minister intend that his statement should carry the meaning that we are not covered by implication for what the British Foreign Secretary does in London?

Mr. FITZGERALD

Certainly.

Mr. FIGGIS

I knew that that would be so, but I wanted the Minister to state it.

Mr. FITZGERALD

No Minister, except a Minister of this Government, has a right to commit this country to anything.

Mr. ESMONDE

In virtue of Subsection 11 of Section 1 of the Ministers and Secretaries Act is not the Minister responsible for negotiations transacted between this State and any other State, and therefore is he not responsible for any arrangement arrived at between any Department of this State and the Government of another country?

Professor O'SULLIVAN

The Ministers Act cannot be brought up in regard to what occurred twelve months ago.

Mr. ESMONDE

I was asking for the future.

Mr. FITZGERALD

I consider that this Department is the main channel of communication with foreign Governments. The Deputy asks about what may have happened last year, but I can only speak of this Estimate for my own Department. I may say that such a thing was, or was not, done, and it might transpire that a Minister, who may, perhaps, not be a Minister of the Government now, in an irregular way negotiated with a foreign Government. I think that Deputy Figgis asked that we should make it clear that any protocols signed at any conference at which we were not directly represented, cannot be binding on us. That is entirely my point of view. Deputy Mulcahy asked about £750 entertainment allowance. I may as well tell the history of that. Last year it appears that there was £150 voted for that, but I failed to realise it, and I paid for a certain amount of entertainment out of my own pocket until I found that I was getting quite beyond my means altogether. I found that that £150 last year was quite useful to me for the later stage of the period. Now we have £750 put down. Only a certain limited amount can be done with that sum. For instance, if a foreign visitor, with a claim for distinction, should come to Ireland, it might be considered my duty to hire a motor car to drive that visitor around the country. It would not last anything like twelve months, or even twelve weeks. We feel that we have a certain duty of courtesy to visitors of certain distinction who come here.

The Deputy asked about one particular visitor. I cannot remember clearly at the moment, but I certainly saw that visitor. I did my best to assist him in anything he wanted done here, and I am not sure that I did not map out his trip to County Wicklow, although it may well be that I did not actually supply the motor car. The sum provided for would be even smaller but for the fact that the Tailteann Games are coming on. It is pretty clear that there will be a great number of distinguished visitors here, and we must be prepared to go at least some length to deal with them in a way that ordinary international or governmental policy demands. There is the possibility of various other distinguished visitors coming over individually, or in numbers, large or small. For instance, I believe there is an Advertising Congress, or something of that nature, to be held here shortly. All these visitors do require a certain amount of courteous reception, and the £750 is a minimum to enable us to do what is barely necessary. We cannot do anything on a large scale. We cannot, as I say, entertain every distinguished visitor who comes, neither can we take over the complete entertainment of any distinguished visitor who comes.

With regard to the representatives abroad, when a representative abroad is purely a trade representative I think that entertainment by him should really be on a very limited scale. I was asked why certain of these countries are chosen, particularly Chile. What happened was, when we took over, there were a certain number of representatives abroad, and we retained those whom we thought to be the most useful. We retained, for instance, the representative in Chile who is an honorary representative. I think it will be desirable that we should extend the number of honorary representatives, because there is diplomatic representation to foreign Governments, and there is trade representation, which is in the interests of Irish producers. There is another matter. In any country where there is what I may call a homogeneous body of Irish people, a body of people of Irish birth or Irish descent, it is important, and it is our duty, I think, to recognise that we have a certain duty towards those people.

Mr. ESMONDE

Why have not those duties been fulfilled?

Major COOPER

Would the Minister consider the sending of Deputy Grattan Esmonde to Australia, where there is a large body of Irish people?

Mr. FITZGERALD

We cannot do everything at once. I do not want to pat myself on the back, but I must say that I think the Department of External Affairs has achieved quite a number of things during the last twelve months. It has achieved as much as one could reasonably expect to achieve in that space of time. I think, as a principle, we should recognise that we have a degree of responsibility for our nationals abroad. We should also recognise that we should assist these homogeneous Irish Colonies, and assist them to assist Ireland by giving them a centre to rally round, and a centre of information, and by giving them an official representative in their midst.

Mr. ESMONDE

I want to ask, what has this got to do with this Estimate? Because there is nothing in this Estimate which could possibly bear upon an organisation or the invitation of the Irish abroad to assist this Government.

Mr. FITZGERALD

My remarks arose from questions as to why we had a representative in Chile. I enlarged somewhat on that.

Mr. GOREY

Perhaps Deputy Esmonde would answer for the Minister.

Professor MacNEILL

The Deputy who raised the point of order had just previously asked a question as to why certain things were not done.

Mr. FITZGERALD

Deputy Cooper asked if this sum for entertainment was used for entertaining foreigners at the St. Patrick's Day banquet. It was not used for that purpose. I agree with the Deputy that a national banquet like that should not be confined to any one Party. He also said that we estimated rather wildly last year, when we had a very much larger estimate for the High Commissioner's office than this year. We did not estimate wildly. We recognised a fact, that had to be recognised, when the office started last year. The Deputy may know that when you take an office it has to be furnished, and furniture costs quite a good deal. The rent of the office is roughly about £5,000, and a sum rather larger than that had, I think, to be estimated for the furnishing of that office. Not only have you to furnish an office when you take it, but you have not to refurnish it every year. Therefore, the second year of the High Commissioner's office costs less than the first year.

Major COOPER

Will the fact of the cost of the furniture be brought to the notice of the Minister for Finance when dealing with claims for commandeered property?

Mr. FITZGERALD

On a general principle some Deputies have recommended that we should have a much wider foreign representation, and others a much smaller representation. I will try to explain my own attitude of mind towards that. I think that our trade representation at the present moment is, as I said, on the lines of exploration. Economically we must recognise that it is impossible for this country to go on indefinitely with practically only one market. Therefore, although a representation in a country may cost £2,000 in a year, and the amount of trade with that country in the next couple of years may not seem to justify it, we have to recognise that we have to search out new markets, because this country cannot continue indefinitely to be entirely dependent on the one market. We cannot ask a representative abroad what amount of trade he brought to this country. We must recognise that the amount of direct trade between this country and countries other than Great Britain has increased during the last couple of years, and has increased as a result of our foreign representation; has increased, I might say, to some extent during the operations of this department. The mere fact that it has increased I think does justify us in hoping that we will be able to continue that increase. Although we cannot possibly in our time get markets able to supplant the British markets—markets in lieu of the British markets— I think we should aim at and hope to obtain a variety of markets for our goods which will be a very considerable supplementary market to Great Britain.

Mr. McBRIDE

Does the Minister refer to export trade or import trade?

Mr. FITZGERALD

I refer to the export trade. On the other hand, with regard to the non-trade representation —that is to say, with regard to the diplomatic representation—for some years we had unaccredited diplomatic representatives abroad. I may say in the days of the first and second Dáil, I considered that a great deal of money was wasted—not that I considered it was waste to have representatives abroad, but I think it was done on too expensive a scale. When we came into being I considered it was better, from the point of view of establishing our status and making clear to the whole world where we stood, to have a fully-accredited Minister Plenipotentiary than to have 54 or 73 unaccredited representatives. We shall have in a week or two a Minister Plenipotentiary accredited at Washington. The fact that he is there conveys more to the people of Sweden, or Finland or any other country, exactly what status we have attained than would the sending of unaccredited representatives to these countries. I do not say that we should be content with one accredited representative. I think we should watch and see where, or whether, our interests demand similar representatives in other places. But I think to have one or two or three fully-accredited representatives is far more important than scattering the globe with unaccredited representatives.

Deputy Johnson spoke about the importance of maintaining relations with the small nations. I quite agree. It is, of course, not feasible for the time being for us to send representatives to all small nations. From the point of view of agriculture, I think that the Minister for Agriculture may consider it advisable during the coming year to send a delegation of agricultural experts to certain Northern countries, where agricultural organisation is brought to a very high pitch, to report on their methods up there. But we have the machinery for keeping in personal touch with many of these small nations; that is, the League of Nations. Deputy Johnson himself, I think, is well aware that at the League of Nations gathering in Geneva, and elsewhere, the small nations make it perfectly clear that they welcome us into their ranks. I think we make it equally perfectly clear that we recognise a community of interest amongst all the small nations in the world.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

With regard to that matter, the representation of agriculture that I referred to was at the Conference of the Institute of Agriculture at Rome.

Mr. FITZGERALD

I was referring to another point. As regards the Agricultural Conference in Rome, we were represented there by representatives of the Department of Agriculture, and a representative of my Department went also, at the request of the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

I would like to ask the Minister if he considers that representation by a Department official is the best kind of representation on such an occasion?

Mr. FITZGERALD

I do not think so. I suggest that the Deputy should bring the matter before the Minister for Agriculture and make other proposals for the next meeting of that body. Deputy Johnson recommended a representative at Ottawa. That, as I said before, is a thing that has been considered and that one recognises is to a large extent desirable. Things during the last couple of months have moved very quickly, and, I think, as it is possible that we may be in very close contact with Canada during the next few months, the consideration as to whether or not we should appoint a representative at Ottawa would depend upon how things go when we are next closely in touch with Canada.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

What is the Minister referring to in that elusive manner about the close contact that is likely to be established with Canada during the next few months?

Mr. FITZGERALD

I was in very close contact with the Prime Minister of Canada a few months ago. It may occur that I might be equally in close contact with him again some time this year.

Major COOPER

Are we to infer, when the Minister is in close touch with the Prime Minister of Canada it is necessary to have a representative at Ottawa? It seems to be exactly the moment when we do not need to be represented at Ottawa.

Mr. FITZGERALD

What I said was that I consider that the question as to whether or not you should have a representative at Ottawa should arise out of and depend exactly on how things turned out in a few months time. Deputy Johnson asked about this preliminary conference which may be held this week prior to the Inter-Allied Conference, which seems to be due to be held next week. As I said, we have not been invited to take part in the Inter-Allied Conference next week, and if we are not invited, I presume that means that we have no responsibility in any matter or any protocol which may arise out of the Inter-Allied Conference. If we are not invited, very well; we are not there and we are not responsible for what takes place. Really, it is bad to discuss what you will do or not do if you are invited. I think you might consider what you will or will not do, at least publicly, when you receive the invitation.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

Does the Minister consider that it might not be a good thing for him to state what we will or will not do if we are invited?

Mr. FITZGERALD

I made that clear just now. I said if we are not invited we have no responsibility in any protocol that may arise out of it.

Mr. JOHNSON

I think there is a little evasion there. Will the Minister say what the preliminary conference is about if it is not about representation at the Inter-Allied Conference?

Mr. FITZGERALD

I presume it would be about the possibilities of representation at the Inter-Allied Conference.

Mr. JOHNSON

I suggest to the Minister for consideration that there is more danger in being invited to consider the question of the British Empire, or Commonwealth, representation at the International Conference, if he is attending that preliminary Conference, in view of the possibility even that he will not be invited to send a representative to the full Conference.

Mr. FITZGERALD

I thought I made it clear, in reply to Deputy Figgis, that I did not consider it is possible to have such a thing as British Empire or Commonwealth representation. There is a representation of the various Governments with full powers. Therefore, presumably, at such a preliminary Conference, if any form of representation was proposed other than direct representation, obviously we would have to say that we could not recognise any such thing, or be bound by any protocol arrived at by anybody other than the body which contained a representative of this country, and invested with full powers. Deputy Johnson asked about arranging a Foreign Affairs Committee. I have no objection. I might say I would welcome it to a large extent, but of course it will be recognised that we could only co-operate and put the material of our Department at the disposal of such a Committee to a limited extent. If Deputy Johnson or other Deputies wish to nominate men who would confer with me and the Government on general matters arising out of policy I for one would be very glad.

Mr. ESMONDE

Could the Minister explain whether such a Committee would be an External Affairs Committee or a Foreign Affairs Committee, and whether it would be in connection with our relations with States not members of this Commonwealth, and whether it would be possible to have a Dáil Committee to confer with him, say, as to our relations with Great Britain?

Mr. FITZGERALD

I am not putting forward any proposal for any Committee on any lines. I stated that my own co-operation might have to be curtailed on certain lines.

Mr. ESMONDE

That would include State members of the British Commonwealth.

Mr. FITZGERALD

The cost of visa to the United States is, roughly, about £2 5s., and the cost of visa to the United States with the British is, roughly, what it is with us, that is, about £2 5s. Generally, the international regulation on this matter is, I think, 10 gold francs, but the American Government for their own purpose, because they are not too anxious to encourage emigration or to make it easy for people to emigrate to the United States, fix their visas at 10 dollars, and automatically we did the same. If America reduced theirs to 10 gold francs we would reduce automatically to 10 gold francs.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

Would not your Department approach the American Government in regard to this?

Mr. FITZGERALD

Yes, but I think the American Government has been approached by most Governments on that point. The cost of the passport is extra. Anybody going from Ireland pays for the passports, 7/6. Those I think are most of the questions that were asked. I think I have made it fairly clear exactly what our attitude is. Our attitude is that nobody can speak for this country unless he has a direct appointment from this country. This country I consider sovereign externally and internally, and not only well able to talk to any country that wants us to talk to it, but certainly we are well able to see to it that it accepts no responsibility for anything to which its own Government has not assented.

I move to report progress.

Agreed.