I desire to say a few words in support of the case that has been made by members of the Labour Party and by Deputy Hewat in regard to the question of unemployment. I do not think that the word "case" is the proper one; I think "demand" would suit the attitude of these Deputies better. The most refreshing thing about the discussion has been the fact that members of the Labour Party and Deputy Hewat, who, on other occasions, may differ, have agreed that this problem is one of the greatest urgency and that it should be dealt with at once by the Government on a broad line of policy. That it is pressing, imminent, and of the greatest —possibly the greatest—importance of anything on the political horizon at the moment cannot be gainsaid. I am sure that not a day passes but every Deputy is confronted with the appalling condition of affairs in regard to unemployment, both in his own constituency and elsewhere. It is a problem which presents extreme difficulties. It is not confined to this country; it is still in existence in England. The conditions are somewhat different there, and I do not think that there is the same — shall I say — justification for the extent of unemployment, proportionately, in this country as there is in Great Britain. Be that as it may, they have made provision across the water for dealing with this matter on certain lines. Here we actually limited the amount of unemployment benefit by depriving those who, at one time, were entitled to what was known as uncovenanted benefit, of that sort of relief, whereas in England they have actually extended that. I am strongly in favour of all kinds of relief works, works of the nature of road-making, and indeed of large projects such as the Shannon scheme and the proposed beet industry, both of which I was in favour of—though I was not in favour of the methods employed in either—particularly on account of the employment that they would give. While I agree that the Government has done much in that direction and that the works of public utility which have been embarked upon will undoubtedly for the moment relieve a certain amount of unemployment, still they will not actually do anything eventually to do away with the problem that now confronts us.
I think that the Minister has now an opportunity, in answer to the demands put forward conjointly by Deputy Johnson and Deputy Hewat, of announcing, if he is in a position to do so, what the Government policy is in regard to the question of unemployment. It may be asking too much; I know that it is not an easy matter for any Government, but I would like to impress upon the Government the extreme urgency of the matter and the necessity for being prepared to come here in the autumn with some plan for dealing with this problem, a problem which will necessarily become more acute as the winter approaches and goes on. Unemployment is by no means confined to the City of Dublin. Possibly, in proportion to its population, the City of Dublin is better off than many provincial towns, because within the last few years industries have grown up in Dublin. Tobacco factories have been started and other institutions have come into being. But take the ordinary provincial town, take the scattered villages throughout the country—I am not now referring to the rural areas but am confining myself to the towns and villages—I say that the state of unemployment in them is probably worse than it has ever been, and the state of trade in any of these centres, as Deputy Hewat has said, is certainly nothing to boast of. That being so, we are confronted now, and we shall be confronted more so when we resume our sittings in the autumn, with a problem which is of the utmost urgency and imminence and which I trust the Minister will be able to say to-day that he and the Government intend to deal with, not altogether by way of temporary assistance or relief, but more by way of a permanent policy whereby he hopes to alleviate and, if possible, do away with the greater part, if not all, of this unemployment. As I said before, it is not a child's task, but the Government are there, and while they are there they are responsible for providing for unemployment, just as much as they are responsible for the general conduct of any other affair in the State. Unemployment is certainly one of the problems which they cannot and must not overlook. It is knocking at the door. It is there night and morning. Some of the people who are out of employment are in a pitiable condition, so that it is the solemn and immediate duty of the Government, at the earliest possible date, to propose some measure, not of temporary but of permanent alleviation. I hope that the Minister will be able to give us that assurance and I anxiously await what he has to say on the subject.
