Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 27 Jun 1934

Vol. 53 No. 9

In Committee on Finance. - Vote No. 54—Gaeltacht Services.

Minister for Lands (Senator Connolly)

I move:—

Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £73,780 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1935, chun Tuarastail agus Costaisí Oifig an Aire Tailte i dtaobh Seirbhísí na Gaeltachta, maraon le Deontaisí um Thógáil Tithe.

That a sum not exceeding £73,780 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, 1935, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Lands in connection with Gaeltacht Services, including Housing Grants.

The Estimate is for a sum not exceeding £73,780 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, 1935, for the salaries and expenses of the Gaeltacht Services Department, including housing grants.

In this Vote is included, in addition to the provision for Gaeltacht Services, the salaries and expenses of the Minister and Parliamentary Secretary and their secretariat. The corresponding Estimate for the previous year was for Fisheries and Gaeltacht Services. The fisheries services were, on the 1st April last, transferred to the control of the Minister for Agriculture and the provision for those services for the current year appears under his Vote.

As will be seen, the Estimate for 1934-35 shows that it is expected that a net sum of £113,780 will be required, as against a net sum of £145,608 for 1933-34—a decrease of £31,828. The main reductions are: rural industries (approximately £15,000), marine products industries (approximately £23,000) and expenditure under the Housing (Gaeltacht) Act (£35,000); against which there is a set-off of £44,000 owing to a reduction in the amount estimated from appropriations-in-aid.

I might point out that in going through the Estimates of previous years I find that whilst much larger amounts may have been estimated, the actual amounts expended did not quite justify the Estimates put forward. This will be readily appreciated from the following figures:—In the year 1931-32 the total Estimate for the Rural Industries was £53,550 but the actual amount expended was only £25,426. In that year a sum of £5,000 was earmarked for the purchase of machines and plant but the actual expenditure was only £1,583. For raw materials it was estimated that £40,000 would be required, whereas only £14,116 was spent under this heading. The Estimates for 1932-33 indicate a somewhat similar position. £42,000 being estimated for Rural Industries, while the expenditure under this head amounted only to £26,479. Last year (1933-34) a sum of £40,958 was provided for Rural Industries, but of this sum only £29,274 was expended.

What I have now endeavoured to do is to put before you as close an approximate Estimate of what will be required for the various sections of the Department under existing conditions. There may be an inclination to criticise reductions in the Estimates but I suggest that what is of importance is the amount spent on Gaeltacht activities and not the amounts that figure on the Estimates and which, in effect, were somewhat wide of what was actually expended.

In the case of rural industries, I have the whole position of these industries under consideration at present with a view to seeing how they can be placed upon a footing which will result in the giving of greater employment to persons in the Gaeltacht without undue cost on the public purse. The Estimate is based on the actual position under existing conditions and may be looked upon as a temporary one and I shall be prepared to come to the House again for any further sums that may be required for developments beyond those at present in existence.

It may interest Deputies to know the comparative figures of sales in tweeds and knitwear from the rural industries for the last three years:—In 1931-32 the sales amounted to £10,892; in 1932-33 the sales amounted to £22,969; in 1933-34 the sales amounted to £24,445. The amounts actually paid to workers for these three years were: 1931-32, £6,250; 1932-33, £12,438; 1933-34, £10,020. Whilst there has been an increase in the sales of the products from these rural industries it is obvious that these industries have not been and cannot be approached as commercial propositions. The aim has been to preserve and extend handcraft industries in the Irish-speaking districts. The conditions prevailing in machine productions and the competition arising therefrom make it increasingly difficult to secure that growth and development that we would all wish to achieve.

To me the real test is the amount of wages which out of the Vote will find its way back to the workers in the Gaeltacht. I am far from being satisfied that this amount is as large as it should be considering the expense to the State that is involved. For that reason the whole position with regard to these industries is at present under close examination to see how we can get the maximum result in wages to the workers with the minimum cost of administration.

Regarding marine products, I regret to say that at the moment owing to international competition between the iodine-producing countries, the world price of iodine, which had stood at the same figure for a great many years, was recently cut to such an extent that the extraction of iodine from kelp is no longer economic.

The sum for the payment to kelp makers is reduced from £25,000 to £10,000, due to a limitation of the quantity of kelp to be handled and to the reduction in price which is being brought about by the successive cuts made last year by the Chilean interests by which the price is controlled.

While the present world price of iodine prevails it is only possible on any basis approaching the economic, to deal with the kelp produced from the sea rods washed up by the tides during the winter as this has the highest iodine content.

It is estimated that the Department will this year deal with a quantity of approximately 2,500 tons as against 4,500 tons handled last year. Moreover, it is only in our effort to tide the industry over present difficulties that even this amount can be taken and the expenditure, in any sense, justified.

It will be noted that in the Appropriation-in-Aid from the sales of kelp a token amount of only £100 has been estimated. We are, however, anxious to preserve this existing industry in the hope that in future years something like the former economic price could be secured. Since the Estimates were prepared there have been certain indications that some improvements in the kelp and iodine position may be expected but these are not yet sufficiently definite to warrant an estimate for substantial return on our kelp sales.

In sub-head F4 there is a reduction of £5,900. The amount estimated for payments to the gatherers of carrageen is based on our experience of last year. It was found that the quantity of this product brought to the Department did not warrant the amount estimated. The Department was in a position to take more carrageen than was offered and if more should be offered it will be bought.

There is little change in sub-heads G1, G2, and G3. Under sub-head H there is a reduction of £1,490. A token sum of £10 only has been taken for loans for the purchase of machines and equipment for rural industries, it being found that the organising of industries by the Department has led to a fall in the number of applications from individual workers. The sum provided for loans for the purchase of boats, carts and draught horses in connection with the marine products industries has been reduced from £1,000 to £100, it being found that the immediate necessities of the case have been largely met by the loans made during the last two or three years. The provision for loans for turf-boats has also been somewhat reduced for similar reasons. The small difference in sub-head I is due to fluctuation in the rate of the cost of living bonus, which forms part of the wages of the domestic instructress.

The provision under J1 for grants for the erection and improvement of houses and outbuildings in the Gaeltacht is reduced from £80,000 to £45,000 because the total sum available for the service under the Housing (Gaeltacht) (Amendment) Act, 1931, has been fully earmarked, and the sum taken in this Vote represents what it is anticipated will be spent in the erection of the houses sanctioned within this limit. A further amending Bill increasing the total sum available by an additional £300,000 has already been introduced, and on its passage it will be possible by Supplementary Vote to make available such additional money as may be required during the year.

The provision in J2 for the erection of teachers' residences stands at £1,500 as against £2,000 last year. The sum taken is for the erection of residences in four cases which it is anticipated will be ripe for carrying out during the year.

Under sub-head K, Appropriations-in-Aid, there is a total reduction of £43,850, of which £27,900 occurs in the item No. (3) sales of kelp.

At the time when this Estimate was framed, the future position in this industry was very uncertain owing to drastic reductions which had been made in the world price of iodine by the international interests by which that price is controlled, and the prospect of further reduction which has, in fact, since taken place. As I have already said, there are signs of improvement, but these are not yet definite enough to justify more than the token amount.

The figure under Section (1), sub-head K, shows an apparent reduction of £13,000. The Estimate of £9,000, although set against the heading "Sales of products of rural industries," in fact represents the net sum expected to be realised after deduction of some £11,000 for wages of operatives and certain other expenses. In other words, it is based on an Estimate of £20,000 gross sales.

The actual total sales of goods during recent years have been, as already stated:—1930/1, £9,346; 1931/2, £10,892; 1932/3, £22,969; 1933/4, £24,245. The sum provided is based on a turnover in the existing industries of about the same amount as last year.

A sum of £5,000 is provided under item (4) for sales of carrageen, as against £8,000 last year. The total amounts actually realised by sales in recent years have been:—1930/1, £985; 1931/2, £3,098; 1932/3, £6,827; 1933/4, £6,445.

The market has somewhat improved since the present Estimate was framed and I anticipate that the receipts this year will, in fact, be somewhat higher than last year.

There is no change in items (5) and (6).

The Estimate does not provide for other or new developments in industrial activities during the current financial year. This does not mean, however, that new efforts will not be made. On the contrary, I am satisfied that very much wider activities must be launched in the Gaeltacht, but I am also satisfied that the present basis and methods of operation may have to be recast. The whole problem has been under careful examination for some months and I hope before long to announce the result of these inquiries and to indicate the lines on which our efforts will be planned. Whilst there is no intention to close down any of the industrial activities that have been operated, except in such cases as clearly indicate that they are entirely wasteful, it is obvious that the present basis of organisation is far from satisfactory.

What adjustments or changes may be necessary I am not yet in a position to state. Every aspect of the situation is being examined and I have been in consultation with all those who are vitally interested in the problem. Deputies realise the peculiar difficulties involved in the Gaeltacht and, whilst I may seem to criticise what was done by our predecessors in office, I am fully conscious of the almost insuperable difficulties that face any administration in regard to this Department. The division of land; the relief of congestion; migration and the resultant readjustment of uneconomic holdings; the maximum development of the peat industry; reafforestation where possible—these are some of the lines on which I hope to secure results.

It has often been argued that the abolition of the Congested Districts Board was a mistake. I am not, at the moment, expressing any opinion on that but I may say that the possibility of establishing a new Gaeltacht Advisory Board, with an administrative board which would be representative of Agriculture, Land Commission, Industry and such other activities, is being carefully considered. The main consideration that I have in mind is to get the type of work and development which will be of permanent value and which will bring the maximum benefit in the form of wages or otherwise to the people of the Gaeltacht at the minimum of expense in administration. To give an example of this, I may cite the recent experience with regard to peat development. Some time ago I sought the co-operation of the peat development section and asked for a special drive in certain Gaeltacht areas. The peat development staff co-operated at once. A representative of the Land Commission, one from the Board of Works and one from the peat development section made a rapid survey of certain Gaeltacht areas. Certain roads and drains were planned and £15,000 is being spent on what would ordinarily rank as relief works. It is relief work but relief work of permanent value. It is estimated that £59,570 worth of turf will be purchased from these areas this year. The whole administrative cost of this is estimated at £1,620, and the purchase price of the peat will go almost entirely to the male labour engaged. I merely give this as an example of the type of productive development that I wish to see attempted. I am not unduly sanguine that we are going to be successful; we are certain to face difficulties but we have got to go on making every effort to overcome the difficulties that are inherent in the problem.

I am hopeful that, with the co-operation that I am at present receiving from all those who are interested in the Irish-speaking people of the Gaeltacht, I will be able to put forward some plans for the better organisation and development of the Gaeltacht areas.

Mr. Lynch

I move: "That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration." When speaking on the Fisheries Estimate a week or two ago I referred to the change that has taken place during the year in divorcing the fisheries from the Gaeltacht services. Those who are acquainted with the Gaeltacht problem know that these two services go hand in hand. Seventy-five per cent. of their activities apply to the same people. This was realised by the former Government, as indeed it was realised by the British Government when they formed the Congested Districts Board. It is essential that there should be complete co-ordination between the activities of the Fisheries Department and the Gaeltacht Services Department in order to get anything like good results. That co-ordination is made considerably more difficult by taking fisheries from this Department and placing it under another Minister.

The Minister in his opening statement said that he would express no opinion as to whether or not it was advisable to do away with the Congested Districts Board. He referred to some advisory committee that it is contemplated to set up. When we left office there was a committee in existence of the type that I think the Minister was referring to. There was a body which used to meet fortnightly and, during certain periods, at intervals of a month. That committee was formed from the principal officers and, in some cases, of the secretaries of the different Departments which carry out operations in the Gaeltacht. These men met under the chairmanship of the then Minister. Their advice was extremely useful. For many of the developments that took place in the latter days of the Department I give full credit to that committee. They were carried out on the advice the committee gave me.

It is extremely difficult for anybody who has the slightest interest in the Gaeltacht to speak calmly on this Estimate, especially when one calls to mind the protestations of Fianna Fáil Deputies in the past—before they occupied the benches on the opposite side of the House. The Estimates presented to the House by the Fianna Fáil Government since they came into office give us an insight into their real policy with regard to the Gaeltacht as distinct from their protestations. I feel that of the very many extraordinary things that the Government have been responsible for since they came into office there is none so shameful as the contempt they have shown generally towards the Gaeltacht. While money is being expended lavishly in various ways, very often in most unproductive ways, the Gaeltacht alone is selected for drastic cuts. It makes one wonder where all the talk has gone about the remnant of the ancient Gaelic stock, and the rest of it, that we used to hear.

The Minister referred to the marine industries, and made a very poor attempt, I thought, to explain away the amazing reductions that have taken place in the two Estimates prepared since the present Government came into office. There is some excuse as regards one—kelp—to which I shall refer later. The facts are that under the heading of marine industries, those dealing with kelp and carrageen, you have this position. Last year, the Estimate for kelp development was cut down from £40,000 to £30,000. That is a decrease of £9,700 on the last Estimate prepared by us. Last year, carrageen development was cut down from £19,500 to £11,250, a decrease of £8,250, making a total decrease in these two items alone of £17,950. What a friendly gesture from the new Government towards the ancient Gaelic stock! The process is continued this year. Kelp development is reduced this year from £30,300 to £12,850, a decrease of £17,450, while carrageen development is cut down from £11,250 to £5,350 or a decrease of £5,900. In other words, on top of last year's decrease of £17,950 for kelp and carrageen, we have this year a further decrease of £23,350, bringing the total decrease for these two items alone up to the astounding figure of £41,300 in the two years. The money provided for the development of kelp and carrageen went to the very poorest people in the Gaeltacht. It was not a dole; there was no taint of charity about it. It was a payment to persons who were prepared to avail of their proximity to the sea to gather the weed and to save it for the market. The money spent in that way I always felt was well spent. There was no demoralisation about it. It was money that was earned hard by persons who were not afraid of hard work if they could get any kind of fair return for their labour.

I was hoping that we would hear a good deal of condemnation from Deputies in the Fianna Fáil Party from Gaeltacht counties, with regard to what I call the monstrous reduction of £41,300, in the first two Estimates of Fianna Fáil for Marine Products Industries. If there is not that condemnation I am afraid we will be forced to believe that there was very little sincerity behind their protestations in the past. Let us look at these little rural industries scattered around the Gaeltacht, where knitting, weaving and embroidery are carried on. There was a slight increase in the service last year, from £37,000 to £40,958, an increase of £3,958. That gave some hope, even though kelp and carrageen gatherers were being hit, that, at any rate something was going to be done for their brothers and sisters who are engaged in these little industries. But if we had any such hopes last year they are rudely dashed aside this year, because the Estimate shows a decrease of £14,807, from £40,958 to £26,151, to make up for an increase of £3,098 last year. Did they make a mistake last year? At any rate they are showing very considerable signs of repentance when, to make up for the increase last year there is a reduction of three times that amount this year.

The net decrease for rural industries over two years is £10,849. If you add that to the figure I gave for the two years' reduction for kelp and carrageen you have a total reduction of £52,149 for industrial development in the Gaeltacht, as the first contribution from Fianna Fáil towards this problem in their first two years of office. One would like to hear what Deputy Cleary, for instance, has to say about that. I am sorry the Deputy is not in the House. I should also like to hear what Deputies from Galway, Mayo and Donegal have to say. In the past they were very vocal in their criticism of the Department, which they thought was not doing half enough; that the former Government was not providing anything like the amount of money that was necessary for these services. I wonder if they are satisfied now with the manner in which the Government they are keeping in office by their votes is dealing with them.

In Estimates of this kind Appropriations-in-Aid are frequently as illuminating as the Votes, because these services are in the peculiar position of being Government Departments engaged in commercial transactions. It is an extremely difficult position, as I realised, for a Government Department to be placed in. But Appropriations-in-Aid, when read with the Vote, provide something in the nature of a balance-sheet. There is a note dealing with the Appropriations-in-Aid, explaining that £9,000 was received from the sales of products of rural industries. This year the net sum does not include the estimated sum of £11,000 for wages. I wonder why there is a departure from the old procedure and why the sum of £20,000 has not been put down as was always the case. Does it make the Estimate any more illuminating than it was in the past by having this segregation now? However, I am not complaining about that. I take it that to compare the figures with last year, taking them as £20,000 as against £22,000 makes the account about line-ball. Unfortunately it does not show continued development. There is slight retrogression rather than development. What I would like to be told is, what is the position throughout these centres. Are they working full time? Are they being supplied with raw material to anything like the same extent as in the past? How do the numbers engaged in these centres now compare with the numbers engaged in the past? While I have nothing to substantiate the statement, I have been told that in many centres in Donegal there is nothing doing; that the centres might, for all practical purposes, be closed; that we continue to keep the centres open, but that there are no workers engaged. If that is so, it is an extraordinary state of affairs. It is very hard to understand it. My recollection of the Department is, especially in Donegal, that these centres with little industries were extremely popular amongst the girls of the localities. The girls were very anxious to avail of these centres to add to the family income. When he is replying I would like to hear from the Minister what are the activities in these centres, or whether it is true that some are practically at a standstill, and that we are merely keeping them open and paying the salaries of manageresses and assistant manageresses purely as a face-saving business, so that we will not have the stigma of closing them.

To a considerable extent I accept the Minister's statement with regard to kelp, and the extraordinary reduction from £28,000 which was estimated for sales last year in the Appropriations-in-Aid down to £100 this year. I can understand that, because anyone conversant with the use we were making of kelp knows that it was subject to the market fluctuation of crude iodine. We hoped some years ago to find some other outlet for kelp apart from the iodine production. Experiments were under way with regard to the use of kelp, or the product of kelp as a cattle food. There was also a question of a manure by-product. I am wondering whether these experiments have been abandoned, or whether the Government have made up their minds that kelp is a thing of the past. I must say that it looks rather like it from the Estimate. If so, we may as well face the fact. At the same time, I wondered why I was given such a vague reply to a question recently. Unfortunately I was not here when the question dealing with this matter came on. The reply I got was to the effect that there was no intention of departing from former activities with regard to kelp, and that we were to go on fostering the industry. We cannot have it both ways. If there is no future for kelp, either for iodine products, as a cattle food, or for manure purposes, the sooner the people who made something out of it are told, the better, so that they may turn their hands to something else. It is an extremely difficult method of earning money, and even if we were able to pay a very high price, it could not be too high for the labour that has to be expended in collecting and preparing the weed for sale.

Carrageen sales are down also, and the Vote, of course, is down by the sum to which I referred a few moments ago. I cannot understand why that should be so. There is the excuse of the world market in the case of kelp. There is no such excuse in the case of carrageen. We had hoped undoubtedly to extend our carrageen markets very largely. A great deal of money was spent in a preliminary campaign of advertising, both in this country and abroad, pointing out the value of carrageen as a food. I believe that the results of that were just beginning to be shown at the time we left office. The carrageen was packed in a very attractive manner and it was reaching a market which it had never reached before, both in America and across Channel in Great Britain. I think it requires some explanation as to why this year we expect a decrease of £3,000 in the sales of carrageen.

We come to sub-head G 1 which is the sub-head dealing with grants under the Gaeltacht Housing Acts, 1929-31, and we have £45,000 voted as against £80,000 last year. When speaking on the Estimate last year I pointed out, and it was not contradicted, that the £80,000 was old money, money which as to about 75 per cent. had been already sanctioned and allocated before the Fianna Fáil Government came into power at all. The fact is that since Fianna Fáil came into office they have not provided one penny piece for housing in the Gaeltacht. The Acts of 1929 and 1931 provided a total of £350,000 for these services. This was almost allocated before we left office. As is well known, I urged, on the Estimate last year and in fact on the Estimate the year before, for the introduction of a Bill to make further provision for Gaeltacht housing. At last, a day or two ago—last Thursday to be accurate—a Bill was introduced. We have now seen the Bill and it amazes me why it was held up so long. I was told at various times that the Bill was under consideration, that the parliamentary draftsman was looking it over and I expected to find a Bill with about 40 pages. The Bill was circulated the day before yesterday. It contains four clauses in all, including the title. It reminds me of the groaning mountain that produced a mouse and was relieved of its labour. I shall leave what I have to say about the Bill to the debate on the Second Reading to-morrow.

This service has been starved for the past couple of years. When I was speaking of it last year, and asking why it was that a further sum was not being made available, in order that an end should be put to the serious hold up there was in the issue of sanctions, the Minister for Finance intervened in the debate, in a debate which was closured, mind you, which everybody knew was going to be closured, and he occupied a large portion of the time of the House in trying to explain away why money was not being provided. His chief reason was this: that during my term of office I had proceeded too quickly, that I had expended the £350,000 too rapidly. He added some further charge, that I had expended the money with an eye to my political supporters, that there was not a fair service given to all applicants for houses, that there was a selective scheme adopted by which our supporters were given the benefits of the Acts and supporters of the Party opposite were denied them. The Minister when challenged was not able to substantiate either one charge or the other. I did not deny the charge of rapidity but on that it would be interesting to quote what Deputies on the other side of the House and what Deputies on the Labour Benches said on the last occasion on which I was responsible for the Estimate. It is the best answer to the Minister for Finance because the demand from the other side was that there should be more and more rapidity in dealing with the matter. There was no suggestion at that time from Deputy MacEntee, as he then was, that we should go more slowly.

The present Minister for Education, then Deputy Derrig, was the Shadow Minister at the time and during all the years, until the Party opposite came into power, he was my opposite number and used to criticise the Estimate. On the last occasion on which I was in charge of the Estimate, I had pointed out that there was need for a certain amount of slow procedure because, with the amount of skilled labour available, it took a year or a year and a half to build a house. Deputy Derrig, as he then was, said at that time, as reported in column 2514 of the Official Debates:

"I do not agree with him that 12 or 18 months are necessary for the building of houses in the Gaeltacht or that the question of skilled labour should be such a problem.... I think, in fact, that the question of skilled labour can be easily settled and that the Minister really cannot put that up as a serious justification for not advancing more rapidly. He has simply told us that the whole of the £250,000 will have been ear-marked in six months time. Whether it is ear-marked or not does not matter. What the House is interested in is the promise of the Minister that the £250,000 will be definitely expended and will definitely represent an asset to the nation in the form of new houses for the people of the Gaeltacht within three years and that the money will be expended within that time."

In other words, there was an urge, from the person responsible for criticising the Estimate at the time, to proceed more rapidly. Deputy Tadhg Murphy from the Labour Benches went on in the same way and he was perfectly satisfied that there was no differentiation between one type of applicant and another. Deputy Murphy, as reported in column 2520 of the Official Debates, said:—

"What struck me most was that the officials concerned with the administration of the Act took an entirely new road in the way in which they carried out their work. They cut themselves absolutely adrift from the old, irritating routine with which we are all familiar adopted by the departmental inspectors in regard to other work. I think there was a very earnest desire shown to give effect to the provisions of the Act as speedily as possible."

He goes on to wish for further and further speed and, if necessary, the provision of more staff. An interesting contribution also was that of Deputy Proinnsias O Fathaigh as he then was who, as reported in column 2537, said:—

"I dtaobh tithe na Gaeltachta, iarraim ar an Aire feuchaint chuige go dtabharfar na deontaisí amach do na hiarrathóirí go luath agus go tapaidh. Deirtear go bhfuiltear ag caitheamh bliain go leith ar thigh do thógáil fá láthair. Iarfainn ar an Aire na daoine atá ag obair ar na tithe do bhrostú i dtreo go dtogfar an oiread tithe agus feidir sara dtiocfaidh an geimhreadh orainn arís."

Deputy T.J. O'Connell, who was the then leader of the Labour Party, took up the speech of Deputy O Fathaigh and went on to say:—

"I agree with Deputy Fahy that the Minister's estimate of one and a half years for the building of a house is altogether too great. It may be that that period would elapse from the making of the application until the house is built. I complained on a former occasion about the rate at which these houses are being built. I admit considerable progress has been made, but there are areas which have not yet been touched."

Then we had Deputy Tubridy from the Fianna Fáil Benches also urging greater rapidity, all absolutely in contradiction of the argument of the Minister for Finance last year. It was, of course, ridiculous to say that this money, which had been provided by the Oireachtas, had been spent too quickly, leaving nothing in the purse for the Fianna Fáil Ministry when they came in to make available for the service. It would only have taken a two-clause Bill to provide further money if there was the will. This delay of two years which has taken place in providing money for Gaeltacht housing will take very considerable explaining away. It might be said, of course, that the general Housing Act passed a few years ago was available for the Gaeltacht; but the people in the Gaeltacht preferred the terms of the Gaeltacht Housing Acts. Facilities were provided under those Acts which are not available under the Acts administered by the Local Government Department. The people wanted to get sanctions for building and repairing houses under those Acts, and the Department was held up for want of money for two years.

At last, as I said, we have a Bill making up, to some extent, for lost time. I hope that when it becomes law the thousands of sanctions that must have been held up for the last two years will be speedily dealt with. I hope those sanctions will be quickly reviewed beforehand, during the progress of the Bill through the Dáil, so that, once the Bill has become law and the money has been made available, there will be no further holding up of those people who have suffered such disappointment for the last couple of years.

Donnchadh O Briain

Rinne an Teachta Fionán O Loingsigh gearán toisc nár caitheadh go leor airgid ar an nGaeltacht. Ach caitheadh níos mó airgid ar an nGaeltacht le cúpla bliain ná do caitheadh nuair a bhí an Teachta O Loingsigh ina Aire. Ní hí an méid airgid a cuirtear síos san meastachán an cheist ach an méid airgid a caithtear. Bhí gráin ar an Teachta toisc gur scaradh Roinn na Gaeltachta agus Roinn na hiascaireachta o na chéile agus go bhfuil an iascaireacht faoi chúram an Aire Talmhaíochta anois. B'fhéidir go bhfuil an ceart aige agus b'fhéidir ná fuil. Admhuighim go bhfuil dlúthbhaint idir an Ghaeltacht agus an iascaireacht. Níl aon amhras faoi sin; ach má thuigeann an tAire atá i mbun na hoibre cúrsaí na Gaeltachta, níl aon bhac air obair na hiascaireachta do stiúrú i gceart.

Labhair an Teachta O Loingsigh ar cheist na dtithe. Chualas gearáin le déanaí mar gheall ar an mhoill atá á dhéanamh i dtaobh tithe do thógáil i gcúpla ceanntar Gaedhealach i gContae an Chlár agus i gContae Chiarraighe. Tá áthas orm go bhfuil sé socair ag an Aire Bille nua do thabhairt isteach agus i bhfad níos mó airgid do sholáthar chun feabhas do chur ar na tithe san nGaeltacht agus chun tithe nua do thógáil. Dubhairt an Teachta O Loingsigh nách féidir leis na Teachtaí ar an dtaobh so den Tigh bheith sásta leis an méid atá á dhéanamh ar son na Gaeltachta. Nílimíd sásta. Dá mbeadh a dhá oiread á dhéanamh ar son na Gaeltachta, is ar éigin a bheimís sásta. Ach níl an ceart ag an Teachta nuair adeir sé go bhfuil faillighe á dhéanamh ag an Rialtas so i dtaobh na Gaeltachta. Fuair muinntir na Gaeltachta a lán tairbhe as na gnáth-rudai a rinne an Rialtas. Fuaireadar a lán tairbhe as scéim na móna, as Acht na bPinsean Sean-Aoise agus as na scéimeanna eile do chuir an Rialtas so ar bun.

Iarraim ar an Aire gan dearmhad a dhéanamh ar cheist na teangan. Tá súil agam ná beidh an tsean-ghearán againn feasta mar gheall ar Bhearlóirí ó Ranna an Rialtais a bheith ag dul isteach san nGaeltacht. Tá baint ag gach Roinn den Rialtas leis an gceist sin. Ba mhaith liom fháil amach an bhfuil aon fheabhas ar an scéal san. Thuigfeadh duine ó Thuarasgabháil do chuir Roinn na mBun-Scoileanna amach tamall ó shoin ná fuil an teanga ag dul chun cinn san nGaeltacht. Chó fada agus na fuil ach an Béarla ag na daoine atá ag dul isteach san nGaeltacht ar ghnóthaí oifigiúla beidh an scéal amhlaidh.

Bhí áthas orm a chloisint ón Aire go mbeidh níos mó tairbhe le fáil ag muinntir na Gaeltachta as scéim na móna agus scéimeanna eile. Tá suil agam go rachaidh siad chun cinn chó luath agus is féidir é. Ba mhaith liom a chloisint ón Aire go mbeidh sé in ánn níos mó a dhéanamh i dtaobh na tionnscail tuatha. Tá droch-chaoi ar an nGaeltacht go fóill agus tá gearán á dhéanamh ag daoine sa Ghaeltacht agus ag Gaedhil ag á bhfuil eolas acu ar cúrsaí na Gaeltachta na fuilimíd ag dul ar aghaidh chó tapaidh agus ba chóir. Ba chóir dúinn bheith ar aon aigne ar an gceist seo. Ní cóir aon easontas a bheith eadrainn ar an scéal. Tá an dualgas orainn uile cabhair a thabhairt chun an cheist seo do réiteach. Is deacair é do shocrú ach tá súil agam go racaidh an tAire ar aghaidh go misniúil leis an obair.

Mr. Dockrell

I would like to suggest to the Government that the time has arrived, in connection with this Gaeltacht service, when they ought to face the facts and run this industry as a business proposition. Of course nobody would suggest that that parallel should be carried too far and if running it as a company showed it was a few pounds on the wrong side that it should be cut down. I do not suggest that for one moment, but the nearer that the Government get to the ideal of running this on business lines, the better for the country as a whole. When one looks at the accounts it appears as if the industry has got too big to be run as a proposition in which grants are made from time to time and the Government are not prepared to face running it on industrial lines. I would like to suggest that one of the steps the Government ought to take would be to present accounts for an industry such as this in a manner approaching to what would be shown if it were an ordinary industrial concern. The Minister showed that the sums appearing in the Estimates provided for the year 1933-34 were evidently widely departed from. That is apparent on the face of things. I asked him questions this year and last year and I was told that the stock of machinery on the 31st March, 1933, amounted to £5,700. I do not know what was the precise figure the Minister said was the actual expenditure for the year 1933-34, but if you add £4,000 provided in the Estimate that would bring the amount to £9,700. The stock of machines on the 31st March, 1934, amounted to £5,549. That indicates a difference of £4,200. I did not quite catch the exact sum the Minister said was expended on the purchase of machinery during 1933-34.

Mr. Connolly

Might I mention that the amount was £611?

Mr. Dockrell

That would bring it to £6,300. Then apparently £800 has been written off for depreciation. On what principle are they depreciating the machinery? I suppose it would not be quite 20 per cent. I would like the Minister to deal with that matter when he is replying. The next thing one notices is the way the sales are given for 1934-35. The amount is £9,000, and the footnote says:—

"This sum represents the balance of the receipts from sales after the deduction of wages estimated to amount to £11,000 in 1934-35 payable to industrial workers in the Gaeltacht and to certain other expenses in connection with the industry."

I would like the Minister to split that £11,000 into wages for the industrial workers in the Gaeltacht and certain other expenses. I asked a question as to what the stock was on the 31st March, 1933, and I was told it amounted to £23,000. I asked what the stock was on the 31st March last, and I was told it amounted to £31,375. If one takes the sales as estimated for the year 1934-35, the expectation of sales would apparently amount to £20,000. That is made up of £9,000 in sales and £11,000 deducted for wages and expenses. There are to be materials provided during the year amounting to £15,000. Taking the ordinary industrial analogy, it seems an extraordinary thing that the stock which, at the beginning of the year 1933, amounted to £23,000, at the end of that year, after sales to the extent of £22,000, amounted to £31,375. The expectation of sales during the coming year is £20,000, so that, apparently, using the ordinary commercial analogy, the Government are carrying 18 months' stock. They are starting the year with 18 months' stock, judged by their sales. Is not that an extraordinary position for a concern that is run on business lines? I should like to suggest to the Minister that he ought to look into the question of how the stock is valued and into its age.

There is another matter that shows that the Government really are unable to make up their minds as to which course to pursue. One would imagine that the course they ought to pursue would be to train the workers manually first of all, in the working of machines and so on, and give them some idea as to what class of goods could be sold in this country. I would like to suggest to the Government that the best way to find out what class of goods could be sold in this country would be to market them through the ordinary channels. If they do that, they would at least have to produce what was considered by experts to be saleable in this country, and they would be giving the workers a better chance of appreciating what could be sold by their own production. Now, what is the position? The position is that the Government have a central depot, and I think they have some retail distributing centres. The Government, to my mind, either ought to make up their minds that they are going to distribute through retail channels themselves and that they are going absolutely to disregard the ordinary trade channels, or they ought to adopt the view that they are teaching workers to produce goods for this market and that the more they teach them what is going to be sold in this country the better for the Government and the better for themselves. I suggest to the Government that the way to do that would be by marketing goods through the ordinary trade channels.

An examination of these accounts shows that it is not being run on industry lines. As I have said, imagine a trading concern starting with 18 months of goods in hands. I think there is a valuable lesson in that if the Government will only learn it. They ought to try to approximate to industrial standards. They ought to produce accounts which will show how they are doing. I do not suggest for a moment that it is necessary that these industries should be run at a profit, but I do suggest to the Government that the more they publish their accounts the better those who are anxious to help them can come in and criticise their accounts and point out to them the defects in their administration and marketing which, I am sure, the Government are only too anxious to realise. I should like to appeal to the Minister to take a broad view of this situation; to regard these industries as approaching that of an industrial concern; and to try to market the goods through the ordinary trade channels as if they were genuine manufacturers. I am sure that if the Minister does that he will give the workers in the country a far better idea of what the country needs. It is no good producing goods that somebody thinks the country ought to use, if they are not going to use them. In conclusion, I would ask the Minister to give me the details that I have asked for from him in these few remarks I have made.

Mr. McMenamin

It is certainly very refreshing to hear Deputy Dockrell from George's Street dealing with a Vote of this kind and to see the House practically empty, and particularly of the greater number of the Deputies from the Gaeltacht constituencies. Before I pass away from what the Deputy said, it reminds me of a certain thing that happened recently. The Deputy pointed out that the Department carries about 18 months' stock on hands. While I am not questioning the accuracy of the Deputy's statement, I am wondering if that is true. If it is true, it casts some light on what I heard recently. A lady was down at Beggar's Bush where the Depot is, and she saw a number of patterns there. After looking over those patterns she came to the conclusion that they were all out of date— that they were the patterns of last year or of the year before.

If Deputy Dockrell has done anything in his speech, he has done us a service by drawing our attention to this fact that would go to show that those stocks are carried there until they become useless. We can go further than that. Take the case of home-made tweeds. Golfers and other people wear those sports tweeds. Each year they come out in different patterns and in different shades. Two or three colours will be bought by everybody while these colours are the fashionable shade. The following year, however, nobody will look at them. The very same thing applies to pull-overs. I did not pay a lot of attention to this lady's story at the time, but there is no doubt about it because she is connected with a number of industrial matters and is well acquainted with such things. I think it is a terrible commentary on things if stuff is allowed to lie down there for a year or 18 months until those patterns go out of date and the stuff is allowed to become useless. I think that some steps should be taken to remedy this state of affairs. There is no hope for any of us— and of course in this matter we are all united in trying to do something for these people— if this thing happens, that stock is kept until patterns go out of date and nobody will buy them and then they must be sold as scrap.

In the Minister's statement there was one part that was tragic news to me. That was the part where he referred to the kelp industry. It is really tragic news for very many of my constituents. There are some communities, complete communities in themselves, in various parts of my constituency who have to live by some effort at fishing. They do a little bit of salmon fishing in the month of June, and then they do some lobster fishing and some white fishing. The other part of their income comes solely from kelp. For the last eight or nine years they had made very considerable sums from it. I agree with Deputy Lynch that it is very hard to earn money in this way. There is no portion of our community that pays such a price for extracting a livelihood from nature as those people do. But if they got a reasonable reward for it, that is all they require. To learn this evening from the Minister that this entire branch of the Gaeltacht services is closed down will be terribly tragic news to them, and really I do not know what the future is to be.

Mr. Connolly

I did not indicate that the industry was being closed down.

Mr. McMenamin

I beg your pardon, I did not catch that.

Mr. Connolly

I did not indicate anything to the effect that the kelp was being closed down as an industry.

Mr. McMenamin

There is a very polite way of saying it. If the kelp is to be sold and no price offered for it, is not that closing it down? What is the meaning of that? Any business for which there is not a market for the time being is closed down. I am not blaming the Minister for it, but I say it is terribly tragic news for these people. What I am thinking about is the future—what is to become of them. I was looking forward to one colony there that was making enough money out of the kelp industry to rehouse themselves. But all hopes in that direction fade out now. The whole thing is thrown back into the melting pot again. All hope of that is wiped out, and there is nothing for them but decay. There was no suggestion from the Minister in dealing with that as to any further use that could be made of kelp. We had some suggestion in this House quite recently, in a debate on some other matters, that considerable use could be made of kelp for animal food. I would appeal to the Minister to do everything in his power to make an opening for this material. If it is not done these people are going to suffer great hardships.

In that respect I think it is tragic also that what has been referred to by Deputy Lynch has taken place—that is, the dividing of the Fisheries from the Gaeltacht Services. I look upon that as a first class blunder. They are twin services. They must stand or fall together. One Department is dealing with one aspect of these peoples' activities and another Department is dealing with some other aspect of their activities. I think it is stupid, to put it bluntly, that these two services were divided. I think this or the next Government must go back and put the two in one Department again.

I am glad to hear from the Minister that he was considering the formation of some body that would take the control and management of this whole question on itself, something in the nature of what was known as the Congested Districts Board. I was glad to hear that suggestion, and I hope he will pursue it, and, having pursued it, that he will be convinced. There is no hope of properly dealing with this question except through some channel of this kind. It should be left to an independent body outside this House, subject to the Minister. It should be left to a body that would be independent, capable, and would understand the question and have adequate funds to deal with any emergency that may arise in these areas. I think when the Minister approaches this thing more closely and examines it and has this information before him, that he will arrive at that conclusion. I think that is inevitable.

With regard to housing, I must say that for the last 12 or 18 months we have been putting down questions in the House seeking information as to when this Bill was to come before the Dáil. At the time this whole question of rehousing in the Gaeltacht, which is so very urgent, was being considered. For various reasons that has been substantially held up for the last two years. I have cases here where work has been done since 1931 and the man who did the work has not his money yet sanctioned. I recently had a letter from a man who did repairs to his house in 1931. That work has not yet been sanctioned, and, of course, he has not been paid. In the letter he threatened not to pay his rates to the county council until he got his grant. Of course, he did not see the effect of that. To him all rates and taxes are the same; he mixes up the county council with the Government and the Government with the county council. In order to soothe him down I wrote back and told him that the payment of his rates had nothing to do with that, and I mentioned that this Bill would be introduced and that in a short time he would get his money.

Now, I see by the Bill that a miserable sum is being provided. I take it that the Minister for Lands will be in charge of this measure when it comes before the House. I will ask him to stretch his arm, because the sum mentioned is utterly useless for what he undertakes. This sum will probably do for one and a half years. Why not make some provision for a larger scheme than that? We have only touched on the fringe of this question and we are only tinkering with it. I was asked by the Minister for Finance when I gave some figures here where I got my information. At the time I did not bother to answer. I wish to tell the Minister now that I arrived at my figures from a memorandum I prepared some months ago for my Party. I asked the various dispensary doctors in the Gaeltacht areas to give me the number of houses in their areas that should be condemned, houses that were substantially unfit for human habitation. If these figures given to me by these doctors are taken, it will be found that it will need approximately £2,000,000 to complete that job. I only mention this matter now to the Minister in order to induce him to approach this question on broader lines.

With regard to the question of kelp, that apparently is hopeless. With regard to carrageen moss, I regret that the sales are not increasing more rapidly. The material is well prepared, well packed and well advertised. I wonder is the restriction in the sales due to the fact that animosity has been aroused in England against the sale of the carrageen moss because it is produced here? At all events, I was so informed and I was wondering was there any ground for that. If so, it is unfortunate that this animosity should react in this way on the people of the Gaeitacht, more particularly now that the kelp industry has gone out of existence for the moment.

With regard to home spinning and weaving, I understand that the practice is that the thread is bought from the spinners and sent to the weavers. They have to weave it. I quite agree that it was rather difficult to get the additional yarn spun by hand, and it was rather difficult afterwards by any process of treatment to put it into any decent appearance. But I would suggest, in order to increase the wages and labour in these districts, that we should revert again to the spinning as well as to the weaving in these areas. The spinning gives a very large amount of employment. There is the carding, the oiling and that sort of thing which give a great amount of work to the women of the house. The men do the weaving and the women spin the wool into yarn. Hence you have increased labour in the household, arising from the double occupation. As a result of purchasing this yarn from the spinners the amount of what has been done in the house is greatly restricted. Hence the amount of money spent in the area is greatly restricted. I would like if the spinning as well as the weaving could be done so as to get as much of the money as we could out of this industry for the people of the district. But over and above this it is useless to do these things unless first there is clearness in the patterns, and secondly, that the designer will give good designs; that the type of design will be kept up to world designs, and that the designs required for each year will be forthcoming. I would ask the Minister to be drastic in this matter. I take it that the person concerned is an official paid by the Government, and if he is not the man to do his job and to produce the very best and most up-to-date designs, cashier him immediately. Design is a condition precedent to success in this matter. It is all right to talk of what happened when Fianna Fáil were in opposition, but I am not concerned with what happened in the past. There is no time for me but to-day and to-morrow. These people are concerned for their actual existence, and what I am anxious about is that the Minister will bring all his energy, vision and courage to bear on this matter, and that he will attend to the remaining branches of the industry. Apparently, now, those are confined to weaving and spinning. For the last two years there have been undertakings given in this House to deal with two factories, one at Crolly and one at Annagry. This matter was Deputy Dillon's particular baby, and I never interfered. As he is not here to-day, I should like to know what happened to them. Has anything been done there, and if anything has been done, how is it progressing? I am utterly ignorant of the details; Deputy Dillon raised the matter in this House, and I consider that I have nothing to do with it. It was his particular concern, but I should like to know what happened in those places.

I was also asked to mention the spinning industry, and to urge, if it could be done at all, that the people in the Gaeltacht areas should be given an opportunity again with regard to it. I gave no promise whatever, because I had some doubts about their efficiency and about their capacity to produce yarn that would produce tweeds to meet present-day requirements. Very likely there will be some trouble with regard to kelp, and some explanation will have to be given about it. I should like to urge with regard to any kelp in the hands of burners at present, that his Department had better take it from them even at a price. I quite appreciate the difficulty in regard to buying kelp and storing it when there is no market. It is very unfortunate that there is no market for the kelp when these people have gone to the trouble of extracting the kelp from the sea, in the wildest winter weather, saving it and burning it, on the assumption that there would be a market for it. They now find that there is no market at all. Very likely these people incurred debts in the winter in providing clothes and boots for their children, and they find now that they have no money to pay for these goods, and I should like to know from the Minister whether or not he is going to purchase any more of this kelp.

Gearóid Mac Pártholáin

Ba mhaith liom tagairt do dhéanamh don locht atá ar Acht na dTithe atá i bhfeidhm sa Ghaeltacht. Im thuairim-se locht ana-tháctach é. Sé locht é sin gur gádh d'iarratasóir ar dheóntas fén scéim seo deimhniú d'fháil ó Choimisiún na Talmhan á rádh nach ndéanfar ath-shocrú ar an méid talmhan atá aige. Muna bhfuil sé in ndon an deimhniú sin d'fháil, ní féidir do cead d'fháil chun tighe do thógáil. Mar gheall air seo, ní féidir do sna daoine ná fuil i ndon an deimhniú sin d'fháil usáid do bhaint as an scéim mar atá sí i bhfeidhm agus ní mór dóibh leannamhaint ina gcomhnuí sna tithe nea-shláintiúla in a bhfuil siad ina gcomhnuí fé láthair. Tá orm an sgéal sin do chun os comhair an Aire agus tá súil agam go leighisfidh sé an locht sin. Tá caoi ag an Aire an locht do leigheas san mBille atá curtha ag an Aire os comhair na Dála.

I should like to draw the attention of the Minister to a very serious defect in the Gaeltacht Housing Act. It is the necessity there is to get a certificate from the Land Commission that an applicant's land will not be subject to rearrangement. If he cannot get that certificate, he cannot get sanction or permission to build, and the result is that there are numbers of people held up who cannot avail themselves of the grant under the scheme as it is at present in force, and who are consequently forced to live in the bad houses they have at present. I think that short of a scheme of migration that clause should be altered in the new Bill now being brought in, or that it should not be enforced too rigidly. The Land Commission is not speeding up the matter of rearrangement. Migration is a much larger problem and possibly will not take shape for a long time, and the people are in a cleft stick as a result, and cannot avail themselves of the grant. I would ask the Minister to take serious notice of that in the Bill he is bringing in. There are two ways of meeting the situation; one is to abolish the clause altogether, and the other to see that the Land Commission carries out the undertaking which they so often give in the letters they send to Deputies who have made inquiries.

Mr. McGilligan

I want to call attention to this Vote in a general way. I am not familiar at all with the details of the sub-heads, and I never was, but there are two or three big general points that start out from the Vote which should be attended to. The Vote itself which we are discussing on the motion to refer back which is actually before the House divides itself into certain sums in relation to housing—and these I want to leave entirely out of my argument at the moment—and certain sums in relation to staff—and in regard to these again, if there is any work being done, there has to be a staff and they have to be paid and certain expenses are involved in the ordinary overheads of the business. There are then two other subsections or divisions of the Vote. One is that section which has the heading "Industrial Development—Rural Industries" and as a second sub-head, "Marine Products Industries." There is also a "Central Marketing Depot", and there is a small sub-head for "Loans for Industrial Purposes." I am leaving out the "Minor Schemes" for the moment. Let us concentrate on this matter of ameliorating conditions in the Gaeltacht through business, through the force of industrial development, or rather through industrial development which is fostered and favoured by Government help. What is the actual situation, as revealed by the Estimate, and, in particular, how far does the situation, as revealed, indicate that there is any special hope of a successful result from this fostering and favouring that is going on? Some of it is very difficult to understand, as Deputy Dockrell has pointed out. Dealing first with the rural industries side of the industrial development of the Gaeltacht, so far as the Estimate is concerned, it conveys this message to Deputies; that a sum of £22,000 had been allocated for the purchase of materials; that that sum this year has been reduced to £1,500; that a sum of £4,000 last year had been allocated for machines and plant, and that has been reduced to £1,000. There is a considerable difference, it must be recognised, between the Estimate provided and the money spent. I understand it is part of the explanation, that of this £4,000 for machines and plant something much less than £1,000 was actually put in, and that the £1,000 as an Estimate this year is in fact an increase on that expenditure of the year before. To some extent apparently that applies also in relation to the materials, but that has got to be joined up with the figures at the end. Sub-head K, Appropriations-in-Aid, on the last page of this Vote, shows that in 1933-4 the sum of £22,000 was the estimated receipt from the sale of products, and that the sales this year are estimated to bring in £9,000. By an asterisk there is a small print reference to the latter sum: "This sum represents the balance of the receipts from sales after deduction of wages, estimated to amount to £11,000 in 1934-5, payable to industrial workers in the Gaeltacht, and of certain other expenses in connection with the industries." Those things are confused as between estimate and actuality.

Again, it is a peculiar thing, and possibly something more than a mere coincidence, that if you take this £9,000 and £11,000 the £20,000 sum represents very nearly another sum of £22,000, which is set down here. Is it a fact that these Estimates are rather blindly made, and that in fact what happens is that the moneys spent on materials are enlarged out to the maximum of what is the estimate, and reduced very much below it, according as to whether or not the sales are good in a particular year? That would appear to be one business way of looking at it.

There is an amazing thing which Deputy Dockrell referred to, and which he brought out here by means of questions; coming into the year which has just passed, that is, at the end of March, 1933, there was £23,000 worth of stock on hands. At the end of March, 1934, there is £31,000 worth of stock on hands. The Department starts off with materials which include finished goods to the extent of £23,000, and they end up the year with stock to the extent of £31,000. In that year, if one is to believe the Estimate, there was added to the £23,000 worth of stock, with which the Department came into the year, a sum of £22,000 to be spent on materials. It obviously was not spent. How much there was spent we have still to hear accurately. Supposing there was only £5,000 spent; you have £23,000 worth of stock on hands coming in, £5,000 spent on materials, with added value when they are worked up, so that the finished goods would be worth something higher than that, and we arrive at the £31,000 at the end of the year. The receipts from sales in that year were supposed to be £22,000. Is this all nonsense, or was there any sale of Gaeltacht products at all? Was there anything more done than materials being bought and wages being paid to certain workers in the Gaeltacht to make up goods to put into stock, and let them—as Deputy McMenamin has said recently—get out of date? If that is the position we will be faced one of these days with a sale at very much under the value not merely of the finished goods but possibly even of the material that was bought to start making those goods. What is the likelihood of success in all this? No ordinary business man could keep going at that rate. No ordinary business man finding he had, after a certain number of years, as much as £23,000 worth of goods on his shelves, would ever put before, say, a general meeting of his company that he expected to spend £22,000 more in that year on materials to work up into finished articles. He would not hope to live through another general meeting if he presented himself at the end of the year and said he had now £31,000 worth of goods on hands.

That leads on to the further question as to what is the policy with regard to those rural industries. I had always thought that the idea which, at one time, energised those who were working this Department, and an idea that had to be commended, was that it was foolish to attempt through the Gaeltacht to produce goods of an ordinary type that had to be sold in competition with mass production goods anywhere; that the only thing one could expect success from in working the Gaeltacht services was concentration on something that amounted either to luxury articles or articles which had something about them of specialised work, something that made them a bit unique and apart from what one would ordinarily buy in a shop as the product of a factory working under mass production conditions. That was a good idea. It was clearly a better idea to try to get the Gaeltacht workers to put artistry and design and everything that appertains to the skilled fingers of the skilled workman into a certain article, to be sold at a high price, than to have those people turning to merely machine products intended to sell in competition with the ordinary shop goods.

That good idea, of course, might break down on one or two points. The design might be bad. The artistry and skill might not be there or might not be introduced soon enough. There might be, at the beginning, too many trial and experimental designs and products, and it seems as if that has been the case. Otherwise, how is one to account for this stock at the end of the period? After all, we are not dealing with very big business. There is not a whole lot of money in it. I do not know if the Minister could give us an idea of the wages fund that has been created through the application of Government moneys and help in the Gaeltacht areas all round. Certainly, coming back again to this relatively enormous stock on hands at the end of the year, seeing it increasing, and having the testimony of people whose constituents are around those areas that the goods are out of date, it does seem as if there had been a mixture of two ideas, namely, home produce of fashionable goods with the fashion changing and goods being left rather as job lots on the shelves; with possibly the other idea working concurrently with that—the idea of trying to produce a rather unique type of article, something that had skill, artistry and design about it, and that that has failed also for some other reason.

Of course the business cannot go on if all that is happening is that the goods are being made, that some wages fund has been created, and that stock is being piled up. If there is no outlet, and if the sales side is not being looked after as well as the production side, in the end there is going to be a considerable loss on the whole business. That loss, of course, in the promotion years of any business might be overlooked if there were a secure prospect of success eventually. It would be a different situation if the Minister were going to tell us that those were merely a sort of apprentice efforts on the part of certain people in particular areas, that skill was coming, that there was some better organisation in relation to sales, and that eventually, although some of the stocks might be left over, there was not going to be a recurrence of the piling up of those goods. That would be another situation, but so far we have not heard that that is the position.

The marine products side, to which attention has also been called, seems to have suffered and suffered badly. In regard to carrageen development, if we are to judge purely by the Estimates, the hopes of sales resulting from it are poor this year—only half as good as they were before. Again, that may be a completely wrong judgement, because it may be that that £11,000 was merely an Estimate, that there is no reality about it, and that that £5,350 is the reality. I heard the explanation of this is that the Department previously provided an amount of money that they thought would be required in connection with carrageen development, that this year judging by last year's result they lowered the sum to £5,000, but that there would be an increase again, to the old figure, if there was stuff there to buy. Is there any explanation why the hopes of last year were falsified, and of how they realised that the figure should be cut down by 50 per cent? Is there anything to fortify their mind that while this year we have to provide an Estimate which is £5,000 reduced, an increase may be required later? What was it that entered into the Estimate last year that made it up to £11,000, and that has it down so low this year? Why is it that the mind of the Department no longer lingered upon the high figure and made them come to the opinion that the sum must be reduced by half?

There is a different story with regard to kelp and while it must be admitted that the reason given is the only one that completely justifies the reduced estimate, and that it is no fault of the Department, it is useful, on this point, to remark that previously those who are now seeing the falsification of their hopes by this reduced amount, used to argue that foreign production need not be taken into account on this matter, and that if arrangements with certain groups in certain zones could be made —and it was asserted that they could be made—there would be no necessity to have the prices beaten down. But it does appear in the direction that Chilian production has sent the price to a point that does not allow an economic production in this country. Why should there be hesitation to embark, in relation to iodine, on the bounty scheme embarked upon, so eagerly, in regard to everything else? I do not know that there is any big differentiation in price, as to the price at which it would be possible to sell iodine from here in France and Great Britain, compared with the world prices, and the prices at which we can grow wheat in comparison with the price at which we could import it. If it is useful to subsidise, from payment derived from the taxpayers, the growth of wheat in this country, and if it is decided to make Britain eat our butter cheaply and at a price less than we pay for it here, in order to keep production up to a certain point in this country, why not in the case of iodine? If we decide, in relation to markets that we profess to believe are gone, but that we nevertheless subsidise in order to get there then, in relation to a small product like iodine which is important in the Gaeltacht, why should it not be subsidised as well as other products that are fed and subsidised by bounties when such an export as iodine would enable us to make the harvest in kelp an economic proposition in this country. It is difficult to see why economic doctrines are changed, in relation to these subject matters.

We have, at any rate, this gloomy picture presented to us by the Estimates for kelp, especially those of 1933-34, that the sum of £30,300 granted last year has suffered a decrease of £17,445. I would like to know if there is anything more in this? I ask if the statement with regard to the Chilian product is the sole and all-sufficient reason for what has happened here. Is there anything else operating against the sale of any product produced from kelp? Is there anything else in the way other than the low price, especially because of the operation of the Chilian group working in certain zones? Again I would like an explanation as to why, on the plan the Government used, they cannot put into operation a plan by which a particular product can be put on the market at a low price so that people are able to continue to supply it at a low price.

The Central Marketing depot keeps its position, as before, but loans for industrial purposes have gone down this year from a sum of £1,700 to a sum of £210. In the case of loans for industrial purposes, so far as there is evidence of the types mentioned in the earlier parts, they have gone down by nearly £1,500, as though all industrial purposes for which loans used to be given are satisfied. Have all offers to start enterprise with the provision of money on loan dried up? The whole matter in relation to capital seems to be based on what occurred in the case of the Chilian group. As to what has happened in connection with carrageen that is not explained. But as far as these two things are concerned apparently there is no great hope for the Gaeltacht area. With regard to industrial development, and rural industries proper, all we can discover is that while there is certain material, and while certain machinery is kept going, and certain sales are being estimated for, all that we have real evidence of is that stocks are being piled up. It is quite right to keep a central marketing depot in full force as long as there is work to be done, and goods to be cleared. Something may be accomplished by means of salesmanship if that is properly directed, and no one could object to this money being expended. But the question of the advisability of spending this money turns on the fact of whether what is being produced is being sold. There is no very bright record of that. I am not at all imputing blame to those in the Marketing depot for that. It may be that the things produced are such that nobody can get them away. There is another side to all this. We are told with great vehemence that there was more money in the country last year than before and we are told that there is more than ever this year. There was a promise of sums in advance of anything that was spent last year. That presumes that there is so much purchasing power in the community. If there is such a desire to aid home development, if there is any such sentimental affection for the Gaeltacht and if that has percolated, as we are told it has, up to Dublin even and shows itself in the buying of products manufactured in the Gaeltacht, how does it come that in spite of all that, in spite of the fact that there is a Marketing depot—I understand that a very skilled, efficient body of people are operating there—that we get back again to the figures, which are the bedrock of all this matter, that were brought out by Deputy Dockrell's question, and that the stocks instead of being reduced are going up? I do not know how far the statement made by Deputy McMenamin with regard to particular products applies to the whole range. Was the Deputy's statement typical of the lot: that it had been observed by those whom he described as being interested in the matter in Donegal that these articles were out of date? Does that apply all round? If the Deputy's statement has application not merely to Donegal but to other parts of the country, then I would like to know if anything is being done in the way of having an examination of the products, of the methods of working, the materials that are being purchased, the machines and those at them, to see whether a change is required and how far that change is going to be effected by methods of working and of sales through the medium of the Department.

There are smaller matters that one might refer to. Any one of them, taken by itself, would not be of any great substance, but I presume the decrease in production is caused by decreased sales. Everything shows a downward tendency. The travelling expenses and subsistence allowances for instructors and manageresses are down to a point half what it was last year, The sum for purchase of looms, knitting machines, equipment, etc., for industrial centres is down from £4,000 to £1,000. The item for purchase of wool, yarn and other material for industrial centres, including cost of finishing—I take it that yarn would be the big item on the main Estimate that I have already spoken to—is down from £22,000 to £15,000. Then, as regards exhibitions of Gaeltacht products at shows and fairs—the cost of exhibits at shows and fairs, including displays by commercial houses and leaving out the specialised item of the exhibition at Cork which had to be paid for in 1933 —the relatively small amount of £400 is cut down by £150, the provision for this year being £250. The cost of advertising and publicity in connection with Gaeltacht products has been cut down from £2,000 to £1,500. The amount spent on any one of these items would not have any very great effect on the mind of anybody when read alone, but when they are all taken together what clearly emerges from this Vote is that the Department has come to the conclusion that, so far as rural industry is concerned, the hopes are less and less, and that in so far as people had any belief that the Gaeltacht was going to become industrialised in the home-working sense and was going to be something brought in to aid these people with the rather insufficient incomes they are enabled to make from land or sea, that that belief is disappearing, and that the whole thing has a downward tendency. Deputies should remember this. We are not told that this situation up in the Gaeltacht is affected at all by the reactions of the Chilian business. This has reference only to the ordinary goods peculiar to this country. The position is much worse if one analyses it as Deputy Dockrell did.

An Ceann Comhairle

Will the Deputy move to report progress?

Mr. McGilligan

I move.

Progress reported; the Committee to sit again on Thursday, 28th June, 1934.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until Thursday, 28th June, at 3 p.m.