If, as Deputy Law has said, the Minister is to be congratulated upon his statement, so far as it concerns inland fisheries, he certainly cannot be congratulated upon it in so far as it applies to sea fisheries. The statement was so gloomy as to be alarming. I regret very much that this Vote is being taken on an evening when there is, for perhaps legitimate reasons, rather a small attendance. In my opinion, the decay of the fisheries is a very serious matter for a country with such small developed resources as the Saorstát. It is strange, indeed, if this House can regard with equanimity a statement so gloomy as that of the Minister, a statement so incomplete as to give us no idea whether there is any prospect of improvement in the immediate future; whether the Minister for Fisheries has given up any hope, as apparently the Minister for Finance has, that the fisheries are going to prove a good proposition at any time. The House will recollect that the other evening when the Gaeltacht Commission's Report was being discussed the Minister for Finance interrupted Deputy Fahy to say that while he agreed that there were fish around the shores of the Saorstát he could not agree that there were either fishermen or markets. That indicates that the most important Minister of the Government, after the President, is not hopeful about the fisheries, and that in itself is a very grave fact. That the Executive Council, charged with the development of the country and with the responsibility of maintaining, particularly, the productive resources of the country, should have no faith in what used to be regarded as one of the most promising fields for enterprise that this country enjoys is, to my mind, a most serious state of affairs. I hope that before this Vote is passed the Minister for Fisheries, or some other Minister, will state definitely whether they have come to the conclusion that fisheries are a useless proposition, that they must be left to decay, or whether they have any intention of making a determined effort to recover the position.
We must remember that during the Great War the income from fisheries was something approaching £1,000,000. That is a very substantial sum, scattered, for the most part, amongst the poorest people. Considering that the fisheries at that time were not under a native Government, one would think that when a native Government got hold of that resource they might hope at least to bring the figure up to something like that amount again. If there were that hope, then I consider the House would be justified in demanding further explanation as to the present decay, or at least in asking the Minister to say whether the present state of things is in his opinion, temporary; whether he has any scheme for improving it; or whether he, too, like the Minister for Finance, apparently has made up his mind that it is only a matter of time until the fisheries disappear.
I come back to the Minister for Finance's statement. He said the other evening that he does not agree that we have fishermen. That raises a very important point, because it must be obvious that there are two sets of fishermen within the country—the fishermen on the Eastern coast whom nobody can deny are fishermen, and the fishermen on the Western coast, who are partly farmers and partly fishermen. In my opinion, there should be a firm differentiation between these two sets. Nobody can deny that the fishermen on the Eastern coast from Clogher Head down through Howth to Arklow and Courtown are industrious, that they love their avocation and are prepared to go to any extreme to make it prosperous. Nobody can say that they have ever shirked their duty in any way. Their record in connection with loans from the Fishery Department is extremely good. I object strongly to any policy which, because of the expense and the unprofitableness of the fisheries on the West coast, would mean less care and less attention to the requirements of the Eastern coast. Other Deputies can plead the case of the fishermen on the West coast, but so far as those on the Eastern coast are concerned they are well worthy of the nation's consideration and of the careful consideration of this House, and anything that can be done to encourage them in their industry should be done.
I submit that there is not merely an industrial problem, but a human problem, in connection with this matter. Everyone who has any regard for the historic Irish nation would certainly regret that the fishery industry should disappear. The fishermen have always been one of the most interesting features in the country. Everybody who knows them will admit that they are an extremely fine body of men, that they are in many ways an ornament to the country, and everyone would regret that they should disappear. But in this case we can only speak of the industry as an industry. I should like to know from the Minister, if the industry is decaying, what is the particular cause. Is it that the men are not working? Is it that the fish are not there? Is it that the markets cannot be found? I think that replies to these three questions should cover the subject. The men are there so far as the districts I know are concerned, and they are ready to work very hard at their calling. I believe that there have not been very good times recently—that the fish have not been so plentiful. Even during last month I do not think the herring fishery was so successful as it has been in previous years. That, after all, has always been the case. There has always been these fluctuations, and I do not think that the occurrence of such fluctuations could be any justification for the Minister's gloomy outlook in making his statement.
I suggest that we should get much more information from the Minister with regard to markets. Not long ago I read in a fishery paper that Holland sends fish to 27 countries. I wonder do we send fish to more than three? We send it to Great Britain and, I think, Germany and America. With regard to the Russian market, for instance, I would like to know what steps have been taken to get in touch with that country with a view to re-opening the market there formerly so prosperous, and which would be such a very great advantage at present. The Minister ought to give us very definite information upon that point. It can hardly be that the Executive Council is so careful of its reputation that it refuses to have anything to do with Russia. If other countries with as big a prestige and as big a standing in the world as the Saorstát are trading with Russia at the present time it would be a great surprise to learn that until the Soviets have mended their manners and have become respectable as other countries we will not have anything to do with them. The Minister himself admitted that that market is of very great importance, and I would like to hear what has been done by his Department, whether by way of sending a representative to Moscow or communicating with the Russian Government to try and re-open business with them.
Similarly with regard to Germany and the countries bordering on Russia where there was always a very big demand for Irish herrings, we should like to know what efforts are made to widen the market there. Personally, I would like, if the Minister does not object to answer a personal inquiry, to know whether anything has been done to get the European market for cured mackerel. I do not know what the present position for cured mackerel is in America. I think the Minister made a statement it was not too prosperous at the moment. At all events for a number of years past competition with Norway was proving too much for the Irish trade, and it threatened to disappear at one time.
I often wonder why no effort has been made—of course I am speaking from information which I have gathered—to try and get a market in Europe for cured mackerel. So far as I am able to find out, I am told that a great proportion of the cured mackerel that goes out to America is consumed by emigrants there from Europe. Then there is the British market. I should like to know how far we are holding our own there and whether that market is availed of to the utmost extent. Then we come to the home market. Various opinions were given on that matter this evening. It is said that we are not a fish-eating people. I do not think any of these explanations is fully satisfactory. A country where the people almost universally abstain from meat on one day of the week ought to be a considerable market for fish. I know the difficulties of this Department, but I am disappointed that the Fisheries Department has not made a better effort to try and establish the sale of fish in country towns in Ireland. Numbers of people who would gladly buy fish are in this position: that in order to purchase fish on a Friday or any other day they have to go to premises that are not business premises or premises up to the standard of cleanliness that would be required for the sale of so delicate a commodity as fish. It often seemed strange to me that this Department has never devised a scheme by which particular shops could be licensed in country towns on certain conditions. In the average town of a couple of thousand inhabitants it would be quite possible to get efficient business people to undertake the sale of fish if they were guaranteed a monopoly, and in that case conditions could be imposed that would make the sale of fish attractive. For instance, the marble slab is necessary for the preservation of fish and to make the establishment at all approachable or tolerable that should be made a necessary condition. I often wonder why the Department could not bargain with at least one such person in each town for the sale of fish. and make such provision that the person who undertook to provide certain conveniences such as that and the necessary amenities should be guaranteed a monopoly of the business. That is one thing I put forward. There is another matter more important.
I think a great opportunity was missed here two or three years ago in connection with the sale of fish in this country. There was a big syndicate established called "Fish Supplies, Limited." It was established with a couple of million pounds of capital in England. For some reason or other the concern failed. The intention of the syndicate was to supply fish directly to the consuming public of Great Britain. For that purpose they had special vans built. These vans were the last word in perfection so far as the carrying of fish safely and attractively was concerned. That concern failed, and these vans that cost very big sums of money were sold for a few pounds each. I often wondered why it was that the Department of Fisheries—I cannot recall the year, but I think it was 1923, and perhaps other things were looming on the horizon— did not procure a few of those vehicles. If there were a few of these vans emanating from places like Howth or Arklow—and the latter port could supply Carlow and Kilkenny—one could easily imagine that they would afford a real test as to whether the Irish people wanted to have anything to say to the eating of fish, and whether they desired a regular supply or not. The opportunity for getting these vans was lost. They could have been got cheaply.
I suggest that as the Ministry of Fisheries is largely a trading concern, and differs very much from other Departments, it might well have indulged in an experiment of that kind. I am sure it could not have resulted in serious loss. There is no good saying we are not a fish-eating people when we import such large quantities of fish. Practically every institution in the country is using fish more than one day a week. In that connection we would like to know what is done to try and get custom for Irish fishermen in the principal institutions. Further, is it correct to say that the fish used by the Free State Army is still purchased from England? Is it correct that all the leading public institutions, such as convents and boarding schools, are almost entirely supplied from the other side of the water? We would like information on that and, if it be so, we would like to know what has been done to combat it. Is it a question of regular supplies? Is there no port in Ireland that can guarantee a regular supply of fish? In his 1926 statement, from which I happen to have a quotation, the Minister said: "Last year the cod and white fish showed a considerable improvement. That was due chiefly to the enterprise and energy of the Arklow and Howth fishermen." That tribute, I take it, is as true to-day as it was two years ago, and if these men have the enterprise and energy, so that in one year they can largely increase the yield of white fish, could not an effort be made to arrange that they would bring regular supplies to a particular port, so that these public or private institutions, as the case might be, would have no excuse for refusing to take their requirements from Irish fishermen? Or is it, again we ask, a matter of regular supplies, a matter of price, or a matter of prejudice? We all know that there is a great quantity of goods brought into this country, and that the only excuse for that is prejudice. We would like to know if there is a prejudice against Irish fish. In connection with what I have just quoted from the Minister's speech, it would seem rather to conflict with what he said in reply to my question a while ago, that the existence of a market in Cork could hardly be maintained without a trawling company within the vicinity of Cork Harbour. If the Arklow and Howth fishermen were responsible for the big increase in white fish in 1926, or perhaps the Minister was referring to 1925, and as these men are not trawlers, I think that would seem to show that white fish can be supplied in considerable quantities without the necessity for trawlers.
There are other matters that we want the Minister to explain, one of the chief questions being that of technical education. I noticed he has given very little information, and has told us very little about what he proposes to do regarding the chief recommendations of the Sea Fisheries Conference. At all events, in the report of the Conference a good deal of stress was laid on the necessity for education. Remember that this Conference was composed of men who were pretty eminent in different walks of life. It was probably as good a Committee as could be got together, composed of men who were not sentimentalists, men who were not prepared to start off with the idea that fishermen are the grandest people in the world, and that everything they wanted should be given to them. I take it that they all approached the question with very critical minds. They made certain definite recommendations, and we have heard hardly one word about them this evening. One recommendation was in regard to technical education, and I think their recommendation is supported by the report of the Commission on Technical Education, which also made definite recommendations with regard to the education of fishermen. We would like to know whether that is to be ignored, or whether it is under consideration, as the question of loans has been for so long. This is one of the recommendations of the Conference that is of most value:
"That in all Government Departments where fish is required the supply of Irish-caught fish shall be insisted upon, as we believe that such fish, while probably costing more, would by reason of its quality and freshness be in the end really more economical, and also that where fish contracts are about to be arranged the Department of Fisheries shall be consulted for advice and information."
We would like to have some statement from the Minister as to how far that recommendation is useful to him, or is being acted upon in his Department. There is another recommendation, No. 18, which states:
That the Department of Fisheries shall examine the possibilities of cooperating with some firm of repute in the Irish fish trade with the object of testing, by an experiment extending over a period of at least six months, the prospect of establishing in one or more selected inland towns a regular market for suitable classes of fish. The Department's commitment in the adventure to be restricted to a limited and definitely agreed contribution towards expenses.
Has that also gone by the board? Perhaps I was responsible for cutting short the Minister's statement, but at all events, if he satisfies us with regard to these things when he replies, we will be grateful to him.
He was rather too brief regarding the organisation of the fishermen. He merely referred to it, and said that he was prepared to give £1,100, I think it was, towards the cost of organising the fishermen, but that his conditions had not yet been accepted by the Fishermen's Association. I think we are entitled to know whether there is a prospect of his conditions being accepted, and, if there is not, whether anybody will be asked to arbitrate, because it is just possible, particularly if the Minister is acting on his own. that a third party would be able to bridge the difference and bring about a compromise between the Minister and the Fishermen's Association. In that connection, too, we would like to know what his ideal is, if he thinks the fishing industry is going to continue, with regard to it. Does he hope to see an industry controlled from the inside? Does he hope to see an industry based on a number of co-operative societies at the most important centres, these co-operative societies being linked up in a federation, and the fishermen, through their representatives, controlling, financing and in every way helping the industry? Is that what he is aiming at? Has he any such vision before him with regard to the industry? So far as I have been able to get information, I find that Norway has probably the most prosperous fishing industry in Europe, and the Norwegian Fisheries Council is based on co-operative societies established at the leading fishery centres.
We would like to know whether the Minister is aiming at that; whether, if he is able to come to terms with the Fishermen's Association, he will endeavour to give that bias to the industry in the future, and whether, so far as his influence with the organisation goes, it will be directed towards that end. But at the moment I think we are entitled to know what is holding up his decision with regard to the Fishermen's Association, that is, if it be a matter where no harm would come from telling the House. I can conceive conditions in which the cause of peace between the two bodies would be injured by giving out facts here; but if that be not the case I think we are entitled to know what the difference is and whether there is a hope of getting over it.
There are many other questions that would have to find a place in a comprehensive statement. For instance, we were told a couple of years ago by the Minister that the kippering business was extremely satisfactory, that there were five kippering houses at Dunmore and that the products of those houses were getting a great reputation on the Continent. How far has that continued successful? How far is there an unlimited market for herrings in Ireland, either fresh or kippered, and what effort is being made to get these herrings marketed in the most profitable way? We would like to know if there is any danger at the present time that if fishing developed to a certain extent there would be no market for certain kinds of fish. Is it not correct that there is almost an unlimited market for herrings? Is it not correct that the sale of kippers, for instance, could be extended very considerably, not merely in Ireland and in Great Britain, but on the Continent? Then there was very little about the loans problem. Of course the Minister for Finance told us the other evening that a Bill was shortly to be introduced. It is a pity, in my opinion, that that Bill was not introduced long ago. I am sure that whatever difficulties existed, they were no more insurmountable two years ago than they are to-day. Anyhow it is hoped that the Bill will not be any longer delayed. In addition to that problem we would like to know whether fishermen are at present being held up from fishing by the fact that their boats need repairs, that they have not the means to do them, and that they cannot furnish the necessary securities. If that be the case in many instances where men are genuine fishermen, where they have good reputations as fishermen and have been regularly engaged in the industry, I think it would be a wrong state of affairs and that it would be a big loss to the country, if the Fisheries Department, simply for fear that it would be too kind to these men, would not go in, and take a risk by giving such a small loan as would be needed for the repair of the boats. We would be glad of some information on that, that is, if the Minister has statistics as to what number of boats are held up at present, the ostensible cause being that the fishermen have not the means to get them repaired.
The Minister referred to a State brand for mackerel and, I think, said that he was about to enforce it with regard to export. Some time ago there was also a proposal for a State brand for herrings, but inasmuch as the Minister said this afternoon that the quality of the herrings taken in recent times has not been up to the usual standard, we would like to know whether he is still of opinion that a State brand for herrings is necessary and whether it would be of advantage to the industry. There is also such a question as insurance—whether, if the Department is to be continued, if the Department is to be regarded as a live Department with a future before it, it would not be possible to devise some method by which fishermen could insure themselves against the failure of the fishing in a particular season. We all know what a serious matter it is for fishermen to have to go to the expense of preparing their gear, and take it away long distances from home and then return with no reward for their efforts.
I believe that the problem is rendered very acute for the Arklow men by the fact that they have to bring two sets of nets with them when they are going to the south coast. They go to the mackerel fishing early in the season, and they bring the herring nets with them for part of the journey. It is necessary, of course, to store one set of nets when they are using the other, and that makes a big hole in their profits. As well as that, one can see that if in such a case the fishing fails, as it has failed on some occasions, that means a big upset to these men, and it would be interesting to know whether the Minister has any scheme by which they could be insured from time to time against such big trials. I thought the Minister would have told us whether the new Agricultural Credit Corporation will be of any benefit to fishery societies, if they are formed. I would also like to know if it is proposed to finance fish curers through the Agricultural Credit Corporation, and whether the Minister thinks that developments may be expected in that direction.
In such an industry as this, where the prospects are, according to the Minister's statement this afternoon, so very gloomy, it is important that some effort should be made to keep the industry stable, not to allow decay to set in, at least prematurely, where it may turn out at any moment that the full utilisation of this resource will be of immense importance to the country, for instance, during the period of another European war, or anything of that kind. In view of such circumstances we hold that this Department requires the most careful attention, and for that reason we ask the Minister to give us as comprehensive a statement as possible with regard to the points that have been raised. We ask him to be frank with us, to tell us what his own mind is on the subject and what the mind of the Executive Council is. We would like to know definitely whether the attitude is merely one of hanging on, or whether it is intended to use the resources of the Department to the last penny for the purpose of infusing life and energy into this industry.