I move:—
That the Bill do now pass.
Public Business. - Turf (Use and Development) Bill, 1935—Fifth Stage.
Can the Minister give us any information as to when he expects to bring this measure into operation and as to the areas likely to be prescribed? Perhaps at this stage the Minister may not be able to tell us what quantity of turf he thinks will be available this season. I may say that there is a good deal of uneasiness in the country in connection with this measure. There is a certain amount of forestalling going on at present, perhaps unnecessary forestalling. The public mind is disturbed in regard to this measure, and it would be useful, I think, if the Minister could give us a statement that would help to set the public mind at rest.
This Bill has been very fully discussed in the House. I do not think any single aspect of it has been shown by the Minister to be likely to be of any use either in the way of the provision of employment in the turf industry or of any greater development in that industry. The Minister considers that the turf industry can be made the second largest industry in the country. He indicated his ambitions and his ideas in that particular direction as early as May, 1932. Since then he has had a number of years' experience of the turf industry generally, and of the operation of societies organised for the purpose of selling turf cooperatively. He has provided for these co-operative societies special railway rates. Turf as a national fuel has been boosted in every possible way. A special organisation has been set up to develop and control these societies. To assist them, the Government started off by using large quantities of turf in Government offices, but in the last couple of years Government ardour in that direction has considerably abated, so that substantially less turf was used in Government offices last year than, say, two years before.
It has already been pointed out that the quantity of turf cut in 1934, the last year for which we have information on the subject, was over 200,000 tons less than the amount cut in the year immediately before the Minister set out to make this the second largest industry in the country. We have not the figures for 1935, but if we want to make a comparison for 1935, with the previous years, we do know that when we examine the amount of turf carried by the railways and other transport companies, we find that the amount of turf they carried in 1935 was less than the amount they carried in 1934, 1933 or 1932. It is my firm conviction that this Bill, so far from doing any good to the turf industry, is going to injure a large number of people who have traditionally worked at the cutting and selling of turf in the past. It is going to prevent them making the earnings out of turf that they made before. We have very little idea yet as to the economic dislocation that all that is going to mean to those people; all that it is going to mean in the way of injuring the economic basis of their lives.
The Minister has had his attention drawn to that fact by Deputies from various parts of the country in whose homes large quantities of turf were used in the past. Deputies have mentioned that they took two full ricks of turf every year from certain turf-cutters. They are going to be prevented from buying turf in that way from these turf-cutters in any area in which the Minister applies this Act, except the people who have been cutting turf join in with a co-operative turf-cutting society. The Minister has had Deputies from various constituencies giving their experience of the co-operative societies and their methods with turf. It has been indicated to him that there are parts of the country where co-operative societies exist and where, instead of buying the turf available to these co-operative societies, persons had to go long distances into a neighbouring county to buy turf from old traditional turf-cutters and were satisfied not only to do that, but to pay higher rates in railway charges rather than be dependent upon the provision made for them by the local co-operative societies.
This Bill is going to mean a very serious dislocation for people who have been traditionally in the turf-cutting industry and whose home economy depends on the possibility of their being allowed to continue. We have the extraordinary position that a farmer may have turbary enough to provide him for the next 20,40 or 50 years. He has been accustomed to burn his own turf year in and year out. If now he wants coal, as many householders throughout the country do use coal, he cannot get the coal without buying turf with it although, as I have said, he might have enough turbary to do him for half a century.
The Minister has given us no idea yet as to the type or size or location of the area in which he is going to start his experiment. A considerable time has passed since the Bill was introduced and there has been a considerable amount of discussion on it. Is the Minister now in a position, as Deputy Morrissey asks, to mention any particular area which is going to be the first, or the first of a number of areas, to which this Bill is going to be applied? Deputies would like to have some idea of what this measure is likely to entail. On every stage of the Bill it was evident that the Minister had no clear objective when he started out; if you like, his objective has got less clear as the various Stages came along. I should like to hear from him in what area he is first going to apply the measure.
Deputy Morrissey has asked for some indication when the Bill will be brought into operation. It is difficult to give that. I can say that I hope it will not be necessary to operate it during the coming season. That, however, is no more than a hope, It may prove to be a realisable hope, but in the event of it being necessary to operate it, it will have to be done. Of course the question can only be determined when knowledge is available of the amount of turf in the hands of co-operative societies for disposal. It is quite possible that this year that quantity will not be more than we will be able to dispose of by ordinary methods without the use of the powers under this Bill. Assuming that not to be the case, I would say that the Bill will be brought into operation somewhat after the commencement of the fuel-purchasing season, because I think we will have to allow the season some weeks to run, unless there is justification for not doing so, before making orders. Possibly, however, we may get through this year without having to use the powers in the Bill at all.
Last season we were apparently faced with a situation in which there was more turf available than was likely to be disposed of, and for a period at the beginning of the season it looked as if a surplus might be carried over to this year. Then came the threatened coal strike in Great Britain and the rise in coal prices that occurred resulted in all the available turf being disposed of without difficulty. There are a number of factors which will influence the situation. I already indicated that the intention was to apply the provisions of the Bill in the areas where turf is produced, where it is most commonly used and where it is most economic to use turf, having regard to its price in relation to the price of coal. One would naturally try not to keep these areas too small because, if they were kept too small, the proportion of turf to be used in relation to coal might have to be fixed too high. But, on the general principle of applying the provisions of the Bill in these areas first, while at the same time endeavouring to ensure that the obligations imposed on merchants or consumers in any area will not be too onerous, the size of the areas and the provisions of the orders will be determined.
It is true, as Deputy Mulcahy said, that we have had a number of years' experience of the problems associated with the large-scale commercial production and marketing of turf. I think we have gained very valuable experience. I think there is available now a body of information relating to the commercial winning of turf and its sale which is entirely new, so far as this country is concerned, and, in some respects, so far as turf production in any country is concerned, and all that experience is being availed of for the purpose of devising ways and means of dealing with the matter of increasing turf production and improving turf distribution in the future.
The other points raised by Deputy Mulcahy were all of a nature which was by no means new. They were all discussed, I think, at considerable length on the various Stages of the Bill. Again I say, even at the expense of repetition, that there is nothing in the Bill which prevents persons buying turf from individual turf producers, nor do I think the Bill is likely to operate in any way to discourage people from doing so.
Except in an area where it is applied.
I am referring to such an area. Where a man has turbary of his own and uses turf mainly as a fuel in his own household, he is provided for by the provisions of the Bill which enable him to purchase coal in quantities of two cwts. and less without having to purchase turf along with it. All the difficulties which Deputies have foreseen in the operation of the measure will prove to be non-existent when it comes to be applied. I grant you there are going to be difficulties——
You may be sure there are.
——but they will be difficulties of a somewhat different character, if my anticipations are realised. I think we can satisfy ourselves that with the powers of this Bill we can create an important industry which will be of very great benefit to the areas of the country in which it will be located. The bog areas are, generally speaking, the poorest parts of the country. People residing in these areas have always had a very hard struggle to make a livelihood and, if the provisions of this Bill or the operation of a general turf scheme afford them an opportunity of earning by their work in the bog a reasonable livelihood, then I think the trouble we will have in overcoming the difficulties associated with that work will be well repaid, and I think we can do that.
Whether the turf development of the future takes the form of extension of the co-operative society system and of the production of hand-won turf, or whether it takes the form of mechanised production such as is being attempted now, or some other form—there are many possibilities in that regard—the full benefit of the additional trade which will be created will go to the people residing in the bog areas. They have been a problem in the past, but they will cease to be a problem if this profitable employment is made available for them in their own localities.
Question put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 41; Níl, 27.
Tá
- Aiken, Frank.
- Beegan, Patrick.
- Blaney, Neal.
- Boland, Gerald.
- Brady, Brian.
- Briscoe, Robert.
- Carty, Frank.
- Concannon, Helena.
- Crowley, Fred. Hugh.
- Crowley, Timothy.
- De Valera, Eamon.
- Doherty, Hugh.
- Flinn, Hugo V.
- Flynn, Stephen.
- Geoghegan, James.
- Gibbons, Seán.
- Goulding, John.
- Houlihan, Patrick.
- Kehoe, Patrick.
- Kelly, James Patrick.
- Kelly, Thomas.
- Killilea, Mark.
- Kilroy, Michael.
- Kissane, Eamon.
- Lemass, Seán F.
- Maguire, Ben.
- Maguire, Conor Alexander.
- Moane, Edward.
- Moore, Séamus.
- Moylan, Seán.
- Murphy, Patrick Stephen.
- O Ceallaigh, Seán T.
- O'Grady, Seán.
- O'Reilly, Matthew.
- Rice, Edward.
- Ryan, James.
- Sheridan, Michael.
- Smith, Patrick.
- Traynor, Oscar.
- Victory, James.
- Ward, Francis C.
Níl
- Bennett, George Cecil.
- Burke, James Michael.
- Costello, John Aloysius.
- Dillon, James M.
- Dockrell, Henry Morgan.
- Esmonde, Sir Csmond Grattan.
- Fagan, Charles.
- Finlay, John.
- Haslett, Alexander.
- Keating, John.
- Lavery, Cecil.
- Lynch, Finian.
- McFadden, Michael Og.
- McGovern, Patrick.
- Morrissey, Daniel.
- Mulcahy, Richard.
- Murphy, James Edward.
- Nally, Martin.
- O'Higgins, Thomas Francis.
- O'Leary, Daniel.
- O'Reilly, John Joseph.
- O'Sullivan, Gearóid.
- Redmond, Bridget Mary.
- Reidy, James.
- Roddy, Martin.
- Rowlette, Robert James.
- Wall, Nicholas.
Tellers:—Tá: Deputies Smith and Moylan; Níl: Deputies Bennett and O'Leary.
Question declared carried.