Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 27 Nov 1936

Vol. 64 No. 8

Private Deputies' Business. - Unemployment Assistance Acts—Motion.

Debate resumed on the following motion:—

Having regard to the wholly inadequate rates of benefit originally provided for unemployed persons under the Unemployment Assistance Act, 1933, and to the fact that during the last two years the retail prices of commodities normally used in working-class homes have been raised substantially, this House requests the Executive Council to introduce proposals for amending the Unemployment Assistance Acts, 1933 and 1935, with a view to providing from State funds adequate maintenance for all persons unable to obtain remunerative employment.—(Deputies Norton, Corish, Davin and Keyes.)

Mr. Corish

When the debate was adjourned on Wednesday night, I was dealing with the rotation system of employment in consequence of the assertion made by the Minister for Industry and Commerce that the Government were placing men at work at standard rates of wages. I indicated that there was a great deal of discontent prevailing in consequence of the low rates of wages that are being paid on these particular works. It was definitely understood in the country, when this rotation scheme was started, that the rates of wages that prevailed in the district for the same class of work were to be paid. In the County Wexford, at the moment, some road work is being done under this rotation system and the men are only being paid at the rate of 24/- a week— 12/-for three days' work. That, I would point out to the Minister, is not in accordance with the statement that he made in the course of his speech. The question of how men are recruited for this rotation system is one to which, I think, the Minister should devote his attention.

I have already pointed out that, notwithstanding the fact that local authorities are compelled to put up 50 per cent. of the amount required to do certain works in their area, they are not permitted to interfere in the employment of any of the men engaged on the work. Now, that may be good or bad, but under the system which prevails at the moment you have some men in receipt of unemployment assistance who will never get any employment out of those schemes. As the Minister knows, the regulations provide that the men who are in receipt of the greatest amount of benefit are taken off the list first, so that in an area, where 13/6 is the maximum, there is no chance of anybody in receipt of under about 12/- ever receiving employment under this system. Notwithstanding the fact that men who are in receipt of the maximum amount of benefit have already got work on these schemes, when a new scheme is started the labour exchange again sends on men starting at the top of the list— that is men who are in receipt of the greatest amount of benefit. I think the Minister will agree that that is not a good system. In one of the towns in my constituency a job, for which there was a grant given by the Government, has just been completed. Men were recruited off the labour exchange list in accordance with the regulations laid down by the Department of Industry and Commerce. They were kept on for a certain time, but, as I have said, the job was completed recently. Now, another new job has been started, and the position is that the same men have been recruited, the labour exchange starting again at the top.

If we want to get away from what people describe as this demoralising dole system, I do suggest that the men who are on the lower grades of unemployment assistance, and who are anxious for work, should get the opportunity of demonstrating the fact that they are anxious for work. I would ask the Minister to pay some attention to that aspect of the situation. If the system continues to be carried out as it has been up to this, one can imagine all the people who are paid under a certain rate of benefit being told, at the end of a certain period, that they are not genuinely seeking employment and, in consequence of that decision by the Minister or his Department, these people will be removed from the pay roll of unemployment assistance. I would ask the Minister to pay special attention to that matter, because men are clamouring for work, notwithstanding the fact that a good number of people in this country say that all that the working classes want is to be paid doles.

The Minister, in the course of his statement, said that the Act under which unemployment assistance has been paid permits of allowances being supplemented from other sources. I think the Minister knows quite well that that is not so. He knows that the means test laid down in the Act is being very rigidly carried out, and that it is almost impossible for a man to get anything like the maximum amount of assistance laid down under the Act if he is getting anything at all from any other source. Therefore, I think the Minister should certainly withdraw that statement.

Mr. Lemass

What I meant to convey was that any income a worker receives from earnings in one year was not calculated as means, and that the income of the worker over a year was supplemented by what he earned during the course of the year.

Mr. Corish

That may be the Minister's conception of what the Act is supposed to do, but it is not the position that prevails in the country when men apply for benefit. The means test is being very rigidly carried out, and things are taken into consideration which surprise not only the applicants for benefit but independent people as well. To come back to the question of the cost of living, as I said earlier, statistics mean very little to the ordinary working man. We know quite well that it is the food bill that is seriously affecting the cost of living at the present moment. Deputy Norton and other Deputies referred to the increase that has taken place in the case of certain commodities. The Minister stated that, in accordance with the statistics presented by his Department, 6d. per week would cover the amount of the increase in foodstuffs in the cost of living. I think that the Minister, before making that statement, should have made an examination of the figures and tried to find out what the actual facts are.

Mr. Lemass

I did not say that either.

Mr. Corish

That is what I inferred from the Minister's statement.

Mr. Lemass

I said that the increase which has taken place in the cost of living since 1933 was 4.4 per cent. and that that was, in respect of the majority of the rates of unemployment assistance, similar to an increase of less than 6d. a week.

Mr. Corish

I think that is the same thing said in a different way.

Mr. Lemass

No, because I did not maintain that the rates of assistance given were capable of providing all the food required by a family.

Mr. Corish

That is what you said at the time of the introduction of the Act. I pointed out to the Minister before that he thought at that time that this was the minimum that a man would require to maintain himself in some kind of comfort, and, in view of the fact that the cost of foodstuffs has increased considerably, I suggest to the Minister that he should make some adjustment in the rates to try and overtake that increase in the price of foodstuffs. The price of coal, flour, butter, sugar, tea and bread has been increased and rents have gone up. Take the question of rent. One has nothing but praise to offer the Department of Local Government and Public Health for their housing schemes and the efforts they are making to solve the housing problem. But that, again, creates another problem for the local authorities and the unemployed for whom we are speaking at the moment. The majority of those unemployed people have, up to recently, been living in slum areas. When the local authority sets about making a clearance order it is invariably found that the majority of the people who have to be transferred from the slum areas to the new houses are unemployed people. The average rents in slum areas all over the country can be taken to be about 2/- per week. The rents of the new houses, to which those people are transferred, range from about 3/6 to 4/6 a week, and sometimes to 5/- a week. That creates another problem for the local authority and also for the unemployed man, because it means an increase in rent of about 2/- a week at least. I know quite well it is a creditable thing to get these people into new dwellings. They have good hygienic surroundings, but if they have not the wherewithal to meet their rent and other demands it creates a big problem for them and for the local authority.

I do not think I have much more to say in this connection. I ask the Minister to examine this rotation system of work which has been launched by the Board of Works. I think it will be found that it is not going to work very satisfactorily. Nobody objects to the unemployed being put to work at this standard rate of wages; the unemployed themselves do not object and neither does any member of this Party; but we believe that as the system is at present being operated it is going to do infinite harm. It will be very hard to get local authorities to embark on schemes under the present arrangements because it will be impossible to get a surveyor or an engineer to give a definite estimate. I should like the Minister to have the matter examined and to endeavour to do something to secure that the people who are on a lower rate of benefit will get some chance of employment at a decent rate of wages.

An Ceann Comhairle

Does the mover of the motion wish to get a decision to-day?

Mr. Norton

A decision to-day would, in my opinion, be based on a very inadequate discussion and, therefore, I think it would be better to let this motion take its normal course.

Mr. McGilligan

I understand the discussion on this motion to-day will be closed at one o'clock. There is only time, therefore, for a few preliminary remarks prior to the discussion arising again next February. The Minister for Industry and Commerce defended his position on this motion, first of all, by saying that there were limits to the resources of the State, a lesson he has apparently learned in the last four years. Secondly, he stated that these rates were not intended to provide full maintenance, which is not quite in accordance with the promises made in the general election of 1933. Thirdly, he goes on to say, after making a poor mouth about everything, that anyone who looks for any indication of prosperity in any country will find abundant evidences of it here. He tells us at one time of all the indications of prosperity, but when it comes to these rates of benefit and to a question of wages he draws our attention to the limit of the resources of the country and he tells us that the country is in a bad way.

The Minister could make quite a good case for the position in which he finds himself, but he dare not. There is really a good case and it could be made. For instance, the Minister could divide the population amongst those looking for work and depending on it for the wherewithal to live into four classes—the industrially-employed, the agriculturally-employed, the unemployed and the fugitives. He has denied there are fugitives. Deputy Morrissey gave him figures to the extent of 40,000 and the Minister said that he would not accept them; they were figures estimated by somebody and he could not accept them. He should consult his colleague, the Parliamentary Secretary for Local Government, who submitted figures on the 11th November. It would appear that 50,000 people have fled these shores in the three years ending May, 1936. I suppose we will be told that that is stopped. So far as I can get information from people living in the country districts, the figure of 23,000 from the middle of 1935 to 1936 will be exceeded. Not merely is that the fact, but this so-called prosperous country, with every indication that a man may wish for in regard to prosperity, is in such a position that 97,000 people have been driven off the land into the cities and the Minister has not given them employment in the cities.

The Minister has a certain view with regard to prosperity. Let me give him some indication of the position as it is observed by people who are moving amongst the poor. Here is a leaflet from the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. What do they say? They allude to the point that Deputy Corish made, that the matter might have been foreseen, the question of the removal of people from slum quarters into other quarters, with an entire neglect of this fact, that by reason of these people having to pay more in the way of rent they have less to spend on food. This is what the leaflet sets out:—

"The provision of new houses in the suburbs for large families who are living on unemployment assistance or home assistance, provides a problem which might have been foreseen. These poor people formerly lived in a single room with just a few pieces of furniture at rents from 3/6 to 7/6 a week according to the accommodation provided. Now they find themselves outside the city with comfortable houses, but practically no furniture, and an increased rent to pay out of the same income they received in the slum dwelling. To this additional rent has to be added train or bus fares for the family when the children go to school or the parents have to go to the city. This is a problem which is not confined to Dublin, but has caused anxiety elsewhere in Ireland and in Great Britain, owing to the reduction in the amount of food purchased so that the increased rent may be paid."

That is one of the aspects of the new problem that has been created. Here is another:

"There are numerous families which in the past were enabled to maintain themselves in frugal comfort on small incomes, but which under present economic conditions find it impossible to live except on a level which amounts practically to starvation."

That comes from people who are moving amongst the poorer sections of the community. They say that people of that type who have slipped below the borderline of frugal comfort into the area of practical starvation have to be assisted very privately and tactfully. A third point emerges:

"In years gone by it was comparatively easy to collect quantities of unwanted clothes for the poor; nowadays it is almost impossible to get anything approaching the amount required."

The Minister thinks that this country has all the indications of prosperity that one could hope for. The St. Vincent de Paul people have not seen them. Everybody is aware that there is a problem from the point of view of the poor in regard to this matter of new houses. "Numerous families" is the phrase that was used. There were many families accustomed to live in frugal comfort and now they are in a position which amounts practically to starvation.

Mr. Lemass

What is driving them to that?

Mr. McGilligan

The Minister will tell us, probably. Is it would depression? The Minister halts, but I think it is the phrase he was going to use.

Mr. Lemass

I am asking the Deputy.

Mr. McGilligan

Fianna Fáil, in the main.

Mr. Lemass

That answer does not satisfy me.

Mr. McGilligan

Of course it does not. I always felt that the plea of an economic depression based on world circumstances would be used. Against that argument I will give a quotation from the Government organ on January 15th, 1932, where they talk about depression and say:

"No doubt, it will be officially ascribed to that convenient world depression which serves as the scapegoat for all the blunders and follies of Cumann na nGaedheal."

They did not think much of it in the early part of the year 1932. Does the Minister think a lot of world depression affecting this country now? He does. The Minister calls on me to say why there are any people unable to live in frugal comfort now. Has the Minister any idea of what has happened in this country in regard to our main industry? Has he seen the figure given by his colleague in the agricultural wages debate? Does he know that in 1929 the farmer and every member of his family employed on the land got £93 and the labourer got £66? Is he aware that in 1934 that figure had slumped to the point that the labourer was getting more than the farmer— that the farmer was getting £51 and the labourer £55?

Mr. Lemass

Are these other people farmers?

Mr. McGilligan

They are.

Mr. Lemass

And do they come under the notice of the St. Vincent de Paul Society?

Mr. McGilligan

The Minister apparently thinks he can segregate the town population from the population concerned with the main industry of the country. That is the fool's paradise he has been living in.

Mr. Lemass

They are not farmers.

Mr. McGilligan

How do you know? I submit that 97,000 of these people have been driven off the land into the cities. Are they some of the people that the representatives of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul are moving amongst? In another year the farmer had got to the point that he was getting £65 off his land, a sum less than he used to pay his labourer. The conditions Fianna Fáil have brought about in this country have driven 97,000 people from the rural areas to the towns, and have driven over 50,000 people in the last three years across to the country with which we are at war. We are sending our hostages over to Great Britain. There may be many of the people who were living in frugal comfort and who now live in conditions amounting practically to starvation who, if they found the same outlet, might be glad to avail of it. I move the adjournment of the debate.

Debate adjourned until Wednesday, 3rd February, 1937.