To-day I asked the Minister for Finance if, in view of the largely increased imports of foreign malt during the nine months January to September, 1930, with resulting unemployment and distress, he will consider prohibiting the importation of foreign malt into the Saorstát. His reply to me was:
"Under existing law the Government have no-powers to prohibit the importation of foreign malt into the Saorstát, and it is not intended to approach the Oireachtas for the grant of such powers in view of the fact that malt is the raw material for the important industry of brewing."
Now it is rather an amazing statement for the Minister to make here that malt is a raw material. When we consider the fact that the difference between the price of foreign barley imported into this country at a price of 7s. 1d. per cwt., and foreign malt being brought in at 15s. 4d. per cwt., we see at once that the difference amounts to 8s. 3d. a cwt. The loss to Irish maltsters, the men working in malt houses is a very large one. This money goes to men working in English malt houses and to men working in malt houses in the North of Ireland. If any sane reason can be put forward for the importation into this country of barley there cannot be any justification whatever and no sane reason for the importation into the country of malt, thus depriving the Irish workers of a sum which I estimate at £131,000—that is a difference between the price of foreign barley and foreign malt. This is a case in which a large amount of unemployment and distress is involved and I can see no justification for the action of the Government in permitting these imports. Whatever justification there may be for the importation of barley into the country there can be none whatever for the importation of this malt.
For the past two days we have been considering, and we will consider again to-morrow, a relief grant of £300,000. Here we have in one item a sum of £131,000 filched from the pockets of Irish workers. The Minister announced to-day that the Executive Council did not intend putting the question of malting barley before the Tariff Commission because malting barley was the raw material of malt; foreign malt is evidently another raw material of whiskey. From what I can see happening here within the past few months the Minister is not the raw material but the finished product of Imperialism. To-day the Minister for Finance had the extreme courtesy to announce that he was not going to reply to me; evidently he has no reply to make and he thought his absence would be the best method of sparing him the trouble of fabricating some answer. I do not know what ties certain brewers in this country have with Deputies on the Government Benches. The Executive Council is not elected to look after the interests of one particular brewery here, but it would seem that they are concerned when the interests of that firm come right up against the interests of a large number of unfortunate people who are thrown out of employment through this importation of malt.
I would like to hear some justification given for the importation of malt. If the Executive Council are going to stand self-convicted of allowing £131,000 to be taken out of the pockets of Irish workers, let them be bold and brazen enough to say: "Our financial interests in Messrs. Guinness are so great that we cannot afford to quarrel with them, though we are depriving the workers of £131,000." We have heard different plausible reasons given from time to time for the refusal to prevent the importation of various products. I am sure the most extraordinary reason was that given by the Minister for Finance to-day when he solemnly announced that malt was a raw product, although it costs £131,000 in workmen's wages to convert malting barley into malt. If we are given such excuses as that, all we can say to Ministers is that we wish them Godspeed in their absence from this House, and we hope that absence will soon be permanent.
