In order not to interrupt speeches that may be made on other matters, and to give the longest possible time to the matters coming on, I think it would be well that this motion should be agreed to now; otherwise if there is to be a division it must be taken before 2 o'clock.
Private Deputies' Business. - Adjournment of the Dáil.—Christmas Recess.
Debate resumed on the following motion made by the President to-day: "That the Dáil, at its rising to-day, do adjourn to February 12th, 1930."
I am afraid we cannot agree to this motion.
The position of the Chair is that the question, if not agreed, must be put before two o'clock, because it has been ruled on a previous occasion that if the question is not put before two o'clock it will go by default, and the House would have to meet next week without being given an opportunity to decide whether it wished to meet or not.
Would agreement end the discussion?
No; the discussion would go on till 2.30.
The position is that it would become unopposed business after 2 o'clock if there is agreement on that and it goes on until 2.30.
It is necessary that we on this side of the House should not alone protest against taking the adjournment now but that our protest should be entered on the records of the Dáil by the only means available besides speeches, and that is by taking a division. It is proposed that we should adjourn for ten weeks. If we had been occupied here for say the last two or three months and kept busy over a period of that kind, excuse might be found for such an adjournment as is proposed of practically ten weeks. But taking into account the session which it is proposed to conclude now I do not think there is any possible reason in the suggestion, first, that we should adjourn now, and secondly that we should adjourn for so long a period. This session has had fifteen working days including to-day. During the last few weeks that the House has been sitting we have met usually two days a week, and one week we did not meet at all, because, as I understand, the Government were not able to provide us with legislation. I think there was enough work to be done, even on the Order Paper as it stands, to keep us busy and well occupied with legislative work during the last two months, or less, during which the House has been sitting. We have not tackled many of the big pressing problems that face the country. There are problems urgently demanding consideration in this House, and some of them have not been adverted to much less tackled. There has been extraordinary delay in bringing forward legislation that has been promised over and over again. Last summer when the session was ending we had many Bills rushed through the Dáil. We saw a similar effort made here last night to rush legislation. Considering the fact that time available for legislative work has been wasted and seeing that Teachtaí have been brought up to Dublin all these weeks for two days per week I am sure if it were put up to them they would have been prepared to sit three or four days a week if the legislation which was pressing and urgent and necessary for the welfare of the country had been put before the House. The fact that this legislation was not produced, though in many cases promised over and over again, requires some explanation. There are Bills like the Town Tenants Bill that the country is clamouring for. All sides agree that the country is clamouring for some legislation to deal with that problem. It is an urgent matter that has been neglected. Promises were made every session that the matter of town tenants legislation would be dealt with.
A Commission was set up, recommendations were made and the whole question has been shelved. There is the urgent matter of fisheries. That has not been touched. I have a long list here of promised legislation. These promises are repeated from session to session; nothing is done. There is the matter of technical education; the question of minerals; the question of poor law in various ways; the question of insurance and the ratification of international conventions. There is quite a considerable list. The President knows very well that these promises have been made and have not been fulfilled and that an opportunity has not been given to the House. The House here is not responsible for the delay in these matters. The House has dealt fairly expeditiously with any legislation that has been put before it, especially during this session. But the House and the country have not been fairly dealt with in the way this session has been conducted, and in the proposition now to adjourn for ten weeks.
There are other matters that are urgently seeking to be remedied. One is the question of unemployment, mentioned here by others to-day. That matter has not been tackled. No effort has been made in the House during the last session and there is no proposition so far as we know, to come before us at an early date to deal with the question of unemployment. No specific effort has been made to tackle that particular problem, and as long as we take such long holidays and act as we have acted in this last session, there is certainly grave reason for people who suffer as the unemployed have suffered—you are giving them very good grounds—for complaint and for acting as some of them act in protest against what they consider the neglect of the unemployed.
These are important matters that require attention urgently, and it is certainly no credit to the House and less credit to the Government to meet here two days a week for fifteen days and call that a session, call that good work done for the country, and then to propose to give ourselves ten weeks' holidays. In my opinion it is not too strong a word to say that it is a scandal.
There are other matters that affect us, and those who send us here, in a material way. Another reason why we object to the House adjourning is because whatever little protection there is for the people I have in mind when the House is sitting, there is much less when the House is not in session. I refer to the maltreatment of Republicans by members of the C.I.D. That thing is going on every day. The force that is supposed to protect the citizens and keep law and order is breaking the law by the maltreatment of citizens and there is no remedy except publicity. The only remedy we have of exposing the scandalous behaviour of those so-called peace officers is publicity, and that is taken away from us when we have these long adjournments. We did make an effort over two years ago also to try and protect some of those prisoners, Republicans and others, incarcerated in some of our prisons. An effort was made to try by means of having somebody in whom we had confidence put on the Prison Visiting Committees, to get accurate and reliable information about many charges levelled against the authorities by persons that were maltreated. A promise was made by the Minister for Justice, nearly two years ago, that if from these benches a panel of citizens was submitted to him he would select a representative. That panel was submitted to him, and, to-day, Deputy Little gave me a letter that he got from the Minister for Justice, in which he acknowledges the promise but refuses to carry it out. He writes:
"It is true that in the autumn of 1927, when a deputation of members of your party came to interview me about certain matters, I informed them that I would favourably consider appointing on the Visiting Committee to Mountjoy Prison a person selected from a list of responsible citizens submitted by the Fianna Fáil Party.
"In 1927, when I received the deputation above mentioned, I entertained the hope that your party were genuinely interested in the preservation of order in this State. My experience of the happenings of the last two years has banished this hope. Where the due execution of the law is concerned, the maintenance of good order, and the protection of life and property, I find in the Fianna Fáil Party no desire to help, and there is ample manifestation of the desire to thwart and hinder.
"In my judgment any claims that your party may have had to have their views considered in making appointments of the nature now in question have long since been forfeited."
Does the Deputy suggest that the matter he is now dealing with has a direct bearing on unemployment?
I suggest it has.
Have we agreed to adjourn, because if not we must take a division before 2 o'clock?
Before the motion to adjourn is put, while I am sure Deputy O'Kelly is just as much interested in the unemployed as I am, we had a discussion here to-day and the President agreed to allow time after the disposal of the Gaeltacht Bill to discuss the unemployment question. I submit that Deputy O'Kelly, perhaps unintentionally, has infringed on that time and it is most unfair. I consider that a good deal of time has been wasted that might have been usefully taken up in discussing unemployment.
Question—"That the House at its rising this day do adjourn until Wednesday, 12th February, 1930"— put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 69; Níl, 52.
Tá
- Aird, William P.
- Alton, Ernest Henry.
- Beckett, James Walter.
- Bennett, George Cecil.
- Blythe, Ernest.
- Bourke Séamus A.
- Brennan, Michael.
- Brodrick, Seán.
- Byrne, John Joseph.
- Carey, Edmund.
- Coburn, James.
- Collins-O'Driscoll, Mrs. Margt.
- Conlan, Martin.
- Cooper, Bryan Ricco.
- Cosgrave, William T.
- Daly, John.
- Davis, Michael.
- De Loughrey, Peter.
- Doyle, Peadar Seán.
- Duggan, Edmund John.
- Dwyer, James.
- Egan, Barry M.
- Esmonde, Osmond Thos. Grattan.
- Fitzgerald, Desmond.
- Fitzgerald-Kenney, James.
- Good, John.
- Haslett, Alexander.
- Hassett, John J.
- Heffernan, Michael R.
- Hennessy, Michael Joseph.
- Hennessy, Thomas.
- Hennigan, John.
- Henry, Mark.
- Hogan, Patrick (Galway).
- Holohan, Richard.
- Jordan, Michael.
- Keogh, Myles.
- Law, Hugh Alexander.
- Leonard, Patrick.
- Lynch, Finian.
- Mathews, Arthur Patrick.
- McDonogh, Martin.
- McFadden, Michael Og.
- McGilligan, Patrick.
- Mongan, Joseph W.
- Mulcahy, Richard.
- Myles, James Sproule.
- Nally, Martin Michael.
- Nolan, John Thomas.
- O'Connell, Richard.
- O'Connor, Bartholomew.
- O'Higgins, Thomas.
- O'Leary, Daniel.
- O'Mahony, Dermot Gun.
- O'Reilly, John J.
- O'Sullivan, John Marcus.
- Redmond, William Archer.
- Reynolds, Patrick.
- Rice, Vincent.
- Roddy, Martin.
- Shaw, Patrick W.
- Sheehy, Timothy (West Cork).
- Thrift, William Edward.
- Tierney, Michael.
- Vaughan, Daniel.
- White, John.
- White, Vincent Joseph.
- Wolfe, George.
- Wolfe, Jasper Travers.
Níl
- Aiken, Frank.
- Allen, Denis.
- Anthony, Richard.
- Blaney, Neal.
- Boland, Gerald.
- Boland, Patrick.
- Bourke, Daniel.
- Brady, Seán.
- Briscoe, Robert.
- Buckley, Daniel.
- Carney, Frank.
- Carty, Frank.
- Cassidy, Archie J.
- Colbert, James.
- Colohan, Hugh.
- Corkery, Dan.
- Corish, Richard.
- Corry, Martin John.
- Crowley, Fred. Hugh.
- Crowley, Tadhg.
- Davin, William.
- Derrig, Thomas.
- O'Reilly, Thomas.
- Powell, Thomas P.
- Ryan, James.
- Sexton, Martin.
- Everett, James.
- Fahy, Frank.
- Flinn, Hugo.
- Fogarty, Andrew.
- Gorry, Patrick J.
- Goulding, John.
- Hayes, Seán.
- Jordan, Stephen.
- Kent, William R.
- Killilea, Mark.
- Kilroy, Michael.
- Lemass, Seán F.
- Little, Patrick John.
- Maguire, Ben.
- MacEntee, Seán.
- Moore, Séamus.
- Morrissey, Daniel.
- Mullins, Thomas.
- Murphy, Timothy Joseph.
- O'Dowd, Patrick Joseph.
- O'Kelly, Seán T.
- O'Reilly, Matthew.
- Smith, Patrick.
- Tubridy, John.
- Walsh, Richard.
- Ward, Francis C.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Duggan and P.S. Doyle; Níl, Deputies Boland and Cassidy.
Question declared carried.
Resolved accordingly.
I have only one sentence to add to what I have said, and that is where such important legislation is so urgently necessary, the slacking behaviour of the Ministry in the last session, and which they propose to continue for another ten weeks, is, in my opinion, a scandal that the Government will find it difficult to justify.
The principal matter that we on these benches desire to deal with is the question of unemployment. It may be said by the President or whoever is replying, that this has come to be a hardy annual. That is all the more reason why the President should be ashamed of it. It only goes to show that he has not done anything, or at least he has not done very much, to lessen the evil of unemployment, because if he had there would not be any necessity for bringing it up here year after year. I hope if the President is replying that he will spare us the usual long list he reads out about what has been done and the moneys that have been provided for the relief of unemployment. We are not concerned with those who have got, through one means or another, employment. We are concerned with those who have not got any employment, notwithstanding the measures which the President claims the Government have taken.
If there was anything at all to show that this unemployment problem is getting worse rather than better, it was provided, I think, in this House during the last few weeks on the Poor Relief (Dublin) Bill. We must take it that the Government were compelled to bring in that Bill to enable the authorities in Dublin to give relief to destitute able-bodied men, and that the position in Dublin County and Dublin City is getting worse than it has been at any time since the present Government came into power. We ourselves know that in the country the position is not improving. We know that during a number of years the Government provided relief grants, and there were fairly substantial sums provided in the Land Commission Estimates and other Estimates, but principally in the Land Commission Estimates, for the improvement of estates. This gave very useful and necessary employment in the rural areas. There was also employment under the Drainage Acts. But the Land Commission Estimate for the improvement of estates was reduced by nearly 50 per cent. this year.
I do not wish to take up very much time, realising that only twenty minutes are available and that a number of other Deputies wish to speak. But there is another matter to which I wish to refer. That is the matter of the Town Tenants Bill. That Bill has been definitely promised in this House by the responsible Minister. On more than one occasion, he promised that the Bill would be introduced. In reply to a question put a couple of months ago by a member of his own Party, the Minister gave a very definite promise that a Town Tenants Bill would be introduced in the present session. A large number of people in the country are looking forward to that Bill. The landlords are taking advantage of the fact that the Bill has not been brought in. Many leaseholders throughout Dublin City and County know that to their cost. The Minister is also aware of that himself. In view of the time that has elapsed since the Town Tenants Commission presented their report to the Minister, there is no good reason why the Bill should not have been introduced and passed into law in the present session. I think we are entitled to know when the Minister gives a definite promise here to do a certain thing why that certain thing is not done. Otherwise we can place very little reliance on the promises made by Ministers.
I think we are also entitled to know from the President what steps, if any, the Government propose to take in regard to the unemployment problem or whether it proposes to take any steps. The Minister for Local Government and Public Health might let us know when he hopes to be in a position to allot to the different county councils the money out of the Motor Taxation Fund, for road improvement work. Usually this money is provided in the spring time when the unemployed are more likely to get work elsewhere than in the middle of winter. I would also like to know from the Minister whether it is proposed to make any grant towards employment on this work, particularly in the rural areas where unemployment during the winter months is so acute. I think if the Government would only speed up the work for which they have provided money they would go a long way towards meeting that problem, so far as it affects the rural areas of the country.
I also want to say some words on this matter of unemployment. I have never urged or advocated that the problem of unemployment could be met by continuous grants of relief sums for the purpose of providing work for limited periods for the unemployed. Undoubtedly the problem of unemployment can only be solved by increasing the production and by the revival of industry. We must not however keep our minds too much upon the long run solution of unemployment and neglect altogether the short run problem as well. Even if the Government had a policy of producing a revival in industry or increasing production in agriculture, it could not provide work for those who are without work to-day, men who will need work to-morrow or next week in order to prevent themselves and their families being left without food or without the other necessities of life. The Government can undoubtedly quote figures to show that they have done something for unemployment. They will quote figures to show that the number of persons in insured employment is increasing and that the number of registered unemployed has decreased. But figures of that nature are very poor consolation to the 50,000 or 60,000 or 70,000 people who are to-day without work in the Saorstát area. In Dublin the position is serious and no juggling with figures will disguise that fact. In previous years the City Commissioners were generally able to provide a certain amount of work to meet the abnormal amount of distress prevailing at Christmas time. This year they are not in a position to do that, and they are in fact dispensing with a number who are normally employed by them during the year. It is only this morning that I got a letter from Commissioner Murphy to whom I wrote concerning a case of distress, and here is the reply which I got:—
We are now approaching the last quarter of our financial year and it has been found necessary to dispense with the services of a number of our casual labourers in order to keep expenditure within the estimates. The result is that we have barely sufficient work for our existing staff and unless grants are forthcoming for the relief of unemployment I can see no possibility of assisting this man in the immediate future.
That is the man about whom I wrote. I would appeal to the Government in view of the fact than unemployment is normally more serious around the winter than in the summer, and in view of the fact that the cost of living is higher during the winter and that, consequently, distress is much more serious now than during the summer, to search every possible avenue along which they might find means of giving the City Commissioners power to give the additional work which in the past they were able to give in Dublin at this season of the year. Unemployment and distress are serious, and though there may be, subsequent to the passage of the Poor Relief Bill through the Seanad, provision made to deal with cases of exceptional distress, nevertheless at present there are men without work who urgently need it. The Commissioners are not in a position to give them work, until the Government will put the Commissioners in the position to do that. I am sure if the Minister for Finance, the Minister for Local Government and Public Health, and the President will seriously examine the possibility of doing that, they will be able to devise some means of doing so. In the interests of the unemployed, I would urgently appeal to them to make some effort to do so.
I would like to appeal to the President to ask the various Departments during the recess to speed up works for which money has been provided already. If they do speed up those works, especially the Land Commission, they will provide a good deal of work to relieve unemployment. There is no doubt that deplorable destitution and unemployment exist both in town and country, and this is really the only means of relieving all that. I make that appeal in the strongest possible manner and if the President acts in that fashion he will do a good deal to remedy the prevailing distress.
I think the fact that only twenty minutes have been allocated to this important question of unemployment is an absolute farce. I might say that it is ridiculous that this House should be called upon to adjourn for two months when there is so much poverty and unemployment prevalent. Thousands upon thousands of unemployed are walking the streets of the cities and towns; they are walking along the by-roads looking for work. I believe that more especially in this session sufficient time has not been given to this problem. Instead of the House adjourning for two months it would be much better if it met for another week in order to try to hammer out a solution for this question. The solution can, with a little effort, be found. The works are there but the money is not provided. Money is provided for other purposes which, to my mind, and to the mind of the unemployed man, are not near as important nor near as deep as this problem.
It is generally realised that three of the poorest counties are Galway, Mayo and Donegal. We find that as far as the expenditure by the Land Commission in County Galway is concerned it amounts to £21,275; the amount expended in Mayo was £13,779, and the amount expended in Donegal was £5,072. That is not treating Donegal fairly, as compared with the other counties. We find that the Forestry Branch of the Department of Agriculture which, during this financial year, expended £21,387, has not expended one halfpenny of that in County Donegal. Is it any reason that Deputies should protest against the state of things that exists, especially in view of the poverty that is prevalent? Is it any wonder there should be protests when we see the Minister for Finance introducing an Estimate for £3,000 to subsidise motor racing in the Phoenix Park while so many people are walking about the cities and towns looking for work? It is a farce that only twenty or twentyfive minutes are allowed to discuss this all-important question. Deputies have not anything like adequate time to deal with the matter. There are large numbers anxious to speak on this subject and I fear they will not get time.
It is, I think, typical of the way in which some Deputies here approach the subject of unemployment that they leave it to the very last moment of the last day of the session and then they bring it out in the way in which it is now brought.
Not at all. I was very anxious to have it raised here on other occasions, but the Government would not give us time.
The Minister is responsible for that.
Deputies can deal systematically with the question of unemployment at any time at which they wish to deal with it. There is no intention on the part of this side of the House to prevent the matter being thoroughly and systematically gone into. What is the position? The position is that Deputies are not prepared to go into this matter thoroughly and systematically. We have had samples of that already.
The Minister is not making much effort to relieve unemployment in Cork. His pets are creating unemployment there.
Shove in a few more tyrants into the county councils.
We have had to-day and at other times samples of the way in which this question of unemployment is approached. In other places it is approached at this particular time of the year by the bringing in of numbers of unemployed into the county council meetings to make representations to the county council and to be present while the members of the county council are discussing the matter. We have had a typical example in the case of Drogheda where the Urban District Council has full authority to go ahead with two housing schemes.
Where the Minister brought one of his pets from. The Minister is placing his tetrarchs all over the country. He has one at Cork.
It was not the Minister who brought him there.
We know who brought him there.
As I say, they have full authority in Drogheda to proceed with two housing schemes. What do they want to do? They want men to be put on relief labour for the purpose of clearing sites— work which ought to be put into the contract. The work could be entered into right away in order to get the housing in Drogheda properly and systematically done.
Not necessarily.
That is a sample of the way in which things are done. It is the same with regard to road work in other places. As far as the general conditions of the policy of the Government are concerned, such moneys as are available are going to be put into the systematic doing of work, whether it is housing, roads or drainage. If we are so poor as some county councils lead us to believe, if we are so poor that they have not money for usefully and systematically doing work, I submit we are too poor to throw money uselessly into unplanned schemes for relief labour, particularly when there is a system of relief available for assisting those in want. There is no use in crying down our morale by pretending that things are really worse than they are. The unemployment situation is better at this time this year than it was last year.
In Dublin?
Yes, in Dublin.
What is your Bill for, then?
I defy contradiction on that point. We have an expression here used by the Superintendent Home Assistance Officer in Limerick County which might be repeated with regard to nearly every other county, including the county for which Deputy Shaw speaks. He says: "Economic conditions are good, regardless of statements that are sometimes made that the people are starving." There is not a county in the West of Ireland in which agricultural wages have not gone up since this time last year. I submit that that alone shows there is absorption of the unemployed into the agricultural industry.
Can you give us figures?
Yes.
Quote them.
I can tell Deputies this, that if you draw a line from Bundoran to Tramore there is not a single county to the west of that line in which agricultural wages have not gone up.
What about the north?
I maintain that agricultural wages in those areas have gone up since 1927.
Quote the figures.
I will indicate the increases in the average weekly earnings of permanent male agricultural workers:—Sligo, 1/3; Mayo, 9d.; Roscommon, 9d.; Galway, 1/-; Clare, 1/9; Limerick, 1/-; Kerry, 3d.; Cork, 6d.; Tipperary, 9d.; and Waterford, 3d.
There will not be many hungry after all that.
That represents the increases in the wages of agricultural labourers. I know that Deputy Lemass says the wages are a discredit to the country, but that is an economic thing that you can only get over in time. Since last year there has been in all these counties an increase in agricultural wages. That shows that as far as the rural districts are concerned there is not an increase in unemployment.
What is happening is that the people are deserting the plough and going to Ford's. That is the case in Cork, anyway.
I have been asked by Deputy Morrissey about roads. I have been in communication with the county councils to let me know their road plans for next year. You are merely throwing away money on roads if you do not see that as far as improvement work is concerned there will be properly detailed plans. I do not know how much money I can give for improvement until I can get a fairly definite figure as to what will be spent on maintenance work. At the earliest possible moment, when I know what the programme for the roads will be, I will give the county councils information as to the amount of money that will be granted. It is the business of the county councils to systematise their road work, if it can be systematised, so as to have the work carried out economically, if it can be done economically, at a time when there is the most labour available.
What is your pet going to do for the unemployment problem in Cork?
That is a matter entirely for the Cork Borough Council.
They are powerless, and the Minister saw that they were powerless.
Did I?
You did—the Brigadier-General again.
The Deputy ought to give some fair play.
We will get none from that quarter, anyhow.
It would be well if Deputies indicated on what particular class of work local bodies can give employment.
What about the interference of Government Departments?
It would be well if they indicated work other than housing, roads, and, in the rural areas, drainage. I will be very glad, and the Executive Council will be very glad, to examine any other particular class of work that they indicate.
Roads and drainage work in Cork?
There are other places besides Cork.
Deputy Anthony does not agree with that.
These are the backbone of the things upon which local bodies can give employment. We are systematising completely as far as housing is concerned——
You are militarising it.
If that means doing things systematically, economically and efficiently, yes.
Sack the lot—that is your policy.
We are doing the same things with the roads. We want to get good value for our money. Wasted money is only going to further impoverish the country and add to the number of the unemployed. In so far as drainage is concerned, you have the county councils so far as minor works are concerned, and the Board of Works and the county councils in so far as the bigger schemes are concerned.
What about the unexpended money in the Minister's own Department?
Unemployment must be systematically dealt with. It cannot be dealt with in the way that Deputies have attempted to do.
The Minister for Justice did not reply to the question I asked about the Town Tenants Bill.
I stated before that I had hoped that the Bill would be completed before this, and would have been introduced before this adjournment. I have found that it is not practicable to do that, but I can assure the Deputy that the matter is receiving my closest attention, and that there is no avoidable delay in the matter.
Could the Minister give me the approximate date on which he hopes to introduce the Bill?
If I were to give an approximate date it would be said to be a definite clear promise.
Would the Minister say within six months
I will not mention any specific date.