Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 10 Nov 1937

Vol. 69 No. 6

Private Deputies' Business. - Standard of Living—Abolition of Duties on Footstuffs—Motion (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:—

That the Dáil deplores the lowering of the standard of living of the community by Government action through the operation of taxes, levies, duties and like impositions on foodstuffs and other necessaries of life, and is of opinion that all such impositions should be forthwith abolished.—(Deputies McGilligan and Morrissey).

Mr. Brennan

The Minister for Industry and Commerce, in dealing with this matter on two occasions, went to a lot of trouble to defend the Government and to show that, so far as the high cost of living and the ability of the people to meet the existing situation were concerned, the Government was not responsible. The Minister is generally very interesting and he is a very good barometer as showing the way Fianna Fáil is feeling in regard to certain questions. Whenever you see the Minister taking up the aggressive attitude he took up on this motion, losing his temper and his voice about it, you may be perfectly sure that he has a bad case. These are his tactics. Notwithstanding all that, I am becoming more and more convinced that the Minister knows perfectly well that he and his Party are responsible for the present state of affairs. His bluff will be called some fine day, not by his opponents in this House but by the condition of things in the country, which neither he nor anybody else can ignore. There is no use in hedging this country around with tariffs, quotas, licences and duties and, at the same time, saying that all these things are not responsible in some degree for the high cost of living. No sane person would say that. It does not matter what pains the Minister takes to impress on the House that his tariffs, quotas, duties and licences are not responsible for the high cost of living, he will not get away with it.

I think it is very unfortunate for this country that Fianna Fáil, the Government at the moment, have lost sight of the main industry in its efforts to build up an industrial arm. There is no use whatever in endeavouring to build up an industrial arm unless you have a thriving main industry—in this country, a thriving agricultural industry. Everybody agrees on that. The Minister does not say that in the House, but whenever he goes out to open a factory, he always takes the opportunity of saying it. It is a great truth which nobody can get behind. We all pay a kind of lip-service to agriculture, but the unfortunate thing is that while the Government do that, they seem to forget it so far as legislative action is concerned and so far as any thought for putting agriculture in a position in which it will be able to meet the demands made upon it by duties, quotas, tariffs and everything else is concerned.

It is very unfortunate also that in this country we have at present a system of tariffs, or a tariff policy, which is not at all the result of legislative action, but is the result of Executive action. There was an Act passed here which gave the Government certain authority in respect of those matters, gave them the right to put on tariffs for certain periods and to bring them before the House afterwards for approval. If one takes up to-day a list of the articles tariffed and tries to pick out the articles tariffed by legislative action as distinct from Executive action, one would be amazed that this House at any time handed over to the Executive the right to tax in the way in which it has. We all admit that the Government have a responsibility towards industrialists in this country, as Governments have in others, and it would be no use trying to build up industry in this country if our markets were to be flooded with the products of cheap world labour; but in endeavouring to build up that side, the Government has apparently forgotten the other side altogether. I think, however, that the Minister for Industry and Commerce, if he gets a chance to mend his hand, will do so. I do not know that he will get the chance, though.

In volume 69, No. 4, at column 544, the Minister makes two statements which, I am sure, will be read with astonishment by many of his supporters in this country. This, mind you, is the Minister who has gone out on a policy of self-sufficiency and has hedged this country round with tariffs, quotas and licences in order to achieve that self-sufficiency. Speaking on this motion, he says:—

"The standard of living of our community would be increased if the national income were increased."

Further down, he says:—

"The national income will be raised when we get higher prices for our exports."

These are two astonishing statements from the Minister. They do not bear out his anxiety for a policy of self-sufficiency in this country, but in that the Minister is simply bearing witness to the truths which have been recognised in every country in the world. I want to quote from the speech of an Australian gentleman, quite recently, in the Commonwealth Parliament in Australia. Speaking on agriculture, the Minister, the Hon. Sir Henry Gullett, said:—

"Failure to expand the overseas demand for their goods must mean restriction to the present volume of production, which in turn, unless the home consumption market was to be glutted and prices broken, must mean the abrupt cessation, of all scientific advancement in every branch of agriculture."

There is not much difference between the two statements. In fact, there is none, except that he simply mentioned agriculture, while the Minister for Industry and Commerce was dealing with exports which, in the main, represent agriculture, so far as we are concerned. The Minister should act upon the principles he enunciated there, that the standard of living will be increased when our national income is increased, and if he goes back to the Statistical Abstract which he recommended to us and to the Irish Trade Journal which he also recommended, and gather from them what were the chances of an increase in national income, what were the chances of an increase in our export trade, he will not find much hope or much encouragement in either of them. The extraordinary thing is that the Minister stands up here and plays a game of bluff. He suggested that Deputies opposite should read the volumes which his Department publishes. I am going to read one of them. In the light of what the Minister said about our national income being increased if we increased our export trade, it makes very doleful reading. On page 198 of the Irish Trade Journal for September, we have the Saorstát crops and live stock returns of 1937, and the extraordinary thing about it is that notwithstanding the fact that the Minister apparently believes what he said in that statement, he has no regard whatever for the facts which are published by his own Department. He always goes out of his way to say that notwithstanding everything else, this country is flourishing.

This is not, I must say, a complete return; it is a partial return from the Department. As far as it goes, it discloses that tillage has dropped by 19,000 acres, milch cows by 38,000, cattle of all kinds by 50,000, pigs by 60,000, sheep by 73,200, and poultry by 916,000. These are not my figures. They were published by the Department of Industry and Commerce. The Government have gone out on a supposedly tillage policy. If these figures are any way correct; that policy is not a success. What we must aim at, no matter to what Party we belong, because we have all to live in this country, is the ability of the people to pay their way. As far as I am concerned, I do not want to gain any political or party kndos in this matter. Let us deal with the figures as we find them. If the Minister says that these figures are to be relied upon, let us judge them accordingly and, to some extent, be guided by them.

Mr. MacEntee

Would it be in order to call attention to the terms of the motion?

That the Dáil deplores the lowering of the standard of living of the community by Government action through the operation of taxes, levies, duties and like impositions on footstuffs and other necessaries of life, and is of opinion that all such impositions should be forthwith abolished.

I do not think the Deputy is talking to that. I do not know what he is talking about.

An Ceann Comhairle

It is true that the motion deals with "the lowering of the standard of living owing to the operation of taxes," and demands the abolition of such impositions. It is equally true—perhaps unfortunately true—that the debate on the motion has been considerably widened. The Deputy, however, might now come to the motion before the House—as to the standard of living being lowered.

Mr. Brennan

I submit that I am dealing with the motion with which the Minister for Industry and Commerce dealt.

An Ceann Comhairle

It does not necessarily follow that that is the motion.

Mr. Brennan

If the Minister for Finance had not been engaged in a private conversation he would have heard what I said. I am pointing to what followed the imposition of levies, duties and quotas. Of course, the Minister for Finance was engaged in a private conversation.

Mr. MacEntee

No.

Mr. Brennan

The Minister did not hear me. Then he woke up. I am referring to something that has led to the impoverishment of our people, when they are not able to meet their demands.

Mr. MacEntee

The conversation was not private. I was asking Deputy Flinn if he understood what you were saying.

Mr. Brennan

I will give the Minister the credit that, at least, he was paying some attention to me, but he did not hear what I was saying. I submit that anything that affects our people in such a way that they are unfitted to meet the high cost of living is relevant. We are dealing with the ability of our people to meet a certain situation, and I am endeavouring to show, because of the reactions of a certain policy, they are not able to do so.

An Ceann Comhairle

The motion before the House deals with the operation of taxes and duties.

Mr. Brennan

I agree. I started by saying that you cannot hedge in any country with a system of tariffs, duties and licences without raising the cost of living. As this matter-was dealt with by other Deputies, I intend to deal with it on the same lines. They dealt with the whole economic policy. If the Chair says I am not entitled to follow them, I will quit; but if somebody is allowed to ramble, the rule has been that someone else rambles after him.

An Ceann Comhairle

It depends on the extent to which he rambles.

Mr. Brennan

The motion deals with levies, duties and so forth. Some figures that I read in the Statistical Abstract will prove this contention, that these levies and duties must, of necessity, be instrumental in raising the cost of living. For instance, we have figures relating to customs. The extraordinary thing about Government policy is that while they claim to have established a large number of factories under a system of tariffs and protection, and while they have gone in for a policy of self-sufficiency, they maintain that they have succeeded in supplying many of the things that were previously imported. If that is true, is it not extraordinary that we had this situation last year, that despite the reduced amount of imports as against 1931—before Fianna Fáil came into power—over £2,000,000 more was collected in customs duties. The natural conclusion is that if certain things are imported over very high tariff walls they must carry the tariffs. If they are still able to get into this country in competition with articles manufactured here, the conclusion is that the price of the home article is up to that of the others. Everyone knows that is true. To that extent the people have to pay, not alone the excess price on the articles that come in, but on every article they buy. When the Government came into office there were 60 or 70 articles dutiable. The number has been increased by hundreds. There is not a single thing that one could think of, whether manufactured here or abroad, that is not carrying a tariff at present. The only excuse for some things carrying tariffs is that they were tariffed for the purpose of giving an incentive to home manufactures. Have they done that? To what extent have they done it? If they have not, is it not time the Government took stock of the situation? The Government puts on high tariffs on certain articles that are imported, in order to give a chance to local industries to expand. If the local industries, instead of expanding, simply put up prices, while imports continue to increase, is the Government to stand idly by? That is what is happening to-day.

Take the years 1936 and 1937. The contribution the Government made towards agriculture is this, as far as tariffs are concerned: In 1936 the Government collected £8,000 odd in tariffs on agricultural machinery. That is a bad way to help agriculture. The year before they collected £6,000. In my part of the country, Irish agricultural machinery is used almost exclusively, and what has been our experience? That when certain tariffs went on foreign machinery we had to pay a higher price for the parts we required for the Irish-made machinery we are using. That statement can be corroborated by the hardware merchants in the West of Ireland. It appears, from the returns before me, that instead of the Irish manufacturers of agricultural machinery extending their business— taking off their coats and capturing the whole of the market—we have had a higher import of foreign machinery this year than we had last year. At least, we have collected more, because the import duties this year amount to over £8,000, while last year the sum the Government collected was £6,000.

Another item which appears in the customs list is agricultural implements —forks, scythes, spades and shovels. These are essentially agricultural implements. The Government are entitled to put a tariff on the import of these articles, and thereby give somebody here the opportunity of manufacturing them. At the same time, the agricultural community are entitled to some protection from the people who do manufacture them. When this tariff was put on, if our home manufacturers had extended their business, we would not have had to pay this year over £9,000 in import duties on the items I have mentioned as against £8,000 last year. It is a rather sorry state of affairs that a Government, which puts itself forward as a tillage Government, can make no better contribution towards helping the agricultural industry than to put a tariff on spades, shovels and forks, and after doing that not to insist that our own manufacturers engaged in that line of industry would manufacture the articles required in the country. The sums that I have mentioned were collected off our farmers on the items mentioned, because, of course, in the end it all comes down to this, that the user must pay.

If we relate those tariffs and import duties to the ability of the farmer to pay up to the price that he is getting for what he has to export, what do we find? The Minister for Industry and Commerce definitely related the price that we are getting for our exports to our ability to meet the cost of living. I know that if a stranger coming into this country took up this list of customs duties and found amongst them items of the kind I have mentioned, and then turned to our export trade, which consists absolutely and entirely of live stock and live-stock products, he would come to the conclusion that the Government that was acting as our Government is, and that has at the same time this balance against the country, had not any interest in agriculture. The result of all those tariffs, quotas and licences is this, that we have got the cost of living here pushed up and our people put into the position that they are not able to buy because their returns from what they have to sell are not what they used to be, all due, of course, to the policy that is being pursued by the Government. We have got an increase in taxation, an increase in the adverse balance against the country, everything in fact which tends to show that things are not in a healthy condition here. Now if we are to be expected to meet high tariffs and duties, we must be put into such a position that we will be able to pay. As the Minister for Industry and Commerce said, our exports must be put into such a position that the standard of living here will go up: that our ability to pay will be based upon the income that we derive from our export trade. At the present time can we look forward with any confidence to that?

If we relate the things disclosed in the Statistical Abstract from which I have been quoting with what the Minister for Industry and Commerce said about the income that we derive from our exports, I think we will be forced to the conclusion that we are not travelling on the right road, and that there is not in this country a true regard for the capabilities of the people to pay. If we are to be expected to meet the demands made on us by industry, we must be placed in a position to do so. Are the Government endeavouring to do that? The whole economic policy of the Government appears to be directed at the present time towards the development of the industrial arm. That cannot succeed if agriculture, our main industry, is not prosperous. If the Government go out for a tillage policy there is no use in their sitting down and waiting when that tillage policy is only returning what is disclosed in this book.

What is the position with regard to tillage in this country? That, notwithstanding the fact that we have had an increased acreage in wheat and beet since 1931—we have had an increased acreage of practically 300,000—the total increase, so far as tillage is concerned, was only 153,000 acres. That is what this book discloses, so that, in the main, we have had two-thirds or three-fourths substitution. Has that substitution been beneficial? Does it help, what the Minister for Industry and Commerce spoke of, our export income, because he said that we must increase that if we are going to increase our standard of living. There is no use in running away with the idea that 100 acres of land or 1,000 acres of land, subsidised, are going to give the same return as 100 acres or 1,000 acres not subsidised. Now, as I said, we have had an increase of 153,000 acres in tillage; but the acreage which had to be subsidised amounted to 300,000 acres. By whom? By the same people that have to pay the tariffs. There is nobody else to subsidise them.

This whole book, from beginning to end, would lead the Minister for Industry and Commerce, or any student who would sit down and study it, into the knowledge that we have been going on the wrong track, and that, no matter what happens to industry in this country, the one thing that must be maintained on a paying basis is agriculture. We have here page after page showing us that, as far as live stock is concerned, as far as the value of anything is concerned, we are on the down grade—gradually on the down grade—and we have disclosed here in this book, in one page, an extraordinary figure with regard to bacon. Bacon is one of the items that is carrying a levy at the present time, and it has been contended by Government supporters that, were it not for the fact that this levy is on bacon, the people would not get the price they are getting for their pigs. It is extraordinary, however, that this volume does not bear this out, for this volume gives us much information that is valuable—very valuable information.

For instance, on page 71 it shows us what our production of bacon was, say, in 1931 and in 1935—our total production. It gives what our imports of bacon were in 1931 and to-day—of course, they are practically nil to-day— and it gives our exports and the value of our production and of our exports and re-exports. Those are very illuminating figures. In the year 1931 our production amounted to 736,000 cwts. of bacon, and we imported 733,000 cwts. In 1935, which is the last year given here, our production was 1,114,110. Now we come to our exports, and here is what is disclosed by these figures. If you add our production of 1931 to our imports of 1931, you get the total amount of bacon that was then in this country. If you do the same with regard to to-day, you get the total amount of bacon here to-day. Then you have the export figures, which you can subtract from the other figures, and they disclose an extraordinary situation. They show you that for some cause—whatever it is—we are consuming in this country to-day 26 per cent. less bacon than we consumed in 1931. Is not that extraordinary? I wonder what accounts for it. Has any member of the Government Party ever thought about this? A tariff was put on foreign bacon with the object of keeping foreign bacon out, and the purpose of the tariff, naturally, was— to give everybody credit for the best intentions—to keep out foreign bacon and to fill the gap thus created by means of the Irish people feeding more pigs. What has happened, however? Certainly that is not one of the things that happened. We are feeding many less pigs to-day than we were feeding in 1931, 1929 or 1928. What has happened? The Minister for Industry and Commerce says that we are exporting much more bacon now than at that time. We are; but the extraordinary thing about it is that the people in this country are consuming 26 per cent. less bacon than they consumed at that time. That is what the figures disclose. I wonder is it that the people in this country are not able to purchase bacon, or is it that they have switched on to lamb and chicken? Have they lost their taste for bacon? Whatever be the cause, I recommend the Fianna Fáil people to study that book which the Minister for Industry and Commerce says he has placed in their hands, and see what they are going to get out of it.

Now, if to-day we are eating 26 per cent. less bacon than in 1931, there must be something to account for it. Since we are dealing with the question of pigs at the moment, I want to show that the tariffs or the levy, as far as this is concerned, have not helped pig production. I will give the House the figures with regard to the number of pigs in the country. In 1931 the total number of pigs in this country was 1,227,003; in 1936 the total number of pigs in the country was 1,016,512—a drop of over 200,000 pigs—and we have, as the Minister for Industry and Commerce stated, increased our exports of bacon. Besides that, we have stopped from coming into this country over £400,000 worth of foreign bacon. We have increased our exports of Irish bacon and we have less pigs. How did it all happen? I wonder is there any relation between that and the inability of the people to buy bacon, or what is the cause? If the Minister for Industry and Commerce is serious when he tells us that, if we want to increase our incomes and if we want to increase our standard of living, we will have to increase and get a better price for our exports—if he has any belief in the statement he made on this very motion before the House—I will refer him to page 27 of this book, which deals with exports of domestic produce and so on. In 1931, live animals accounted for £18,000,000 in exports, whereas in 1936 they accounted for £8,000,000. That is very sad reading. Our total exports in 1931—taking everything into account —amounted to £35,000,000, and our total exports in 1936 were £21,000,000.

Here is what I am coming at. Of the £35,000,000 worth exported in 1931, £27,000,000 was accounted for by live animals and foodstuffs of animal origin —in other words, agriculture. In 1936, out of the £21,000,000 worth, £15,000,000 worth was accounted for by live animals and foodstuffs of animal origin. That is rather a sad commentary on the way in which agriculture has been treated in this country. If that is any reflection of the state of affairs in this country, if it reflects properly what the Minister was endeavouring to tell this House when he spoke on this motion, that our standard of living will go up as our export trade goes up, it is very sad reading for the Minister.

In addition to that we had at that time other factors which helped to swell the private exchequers of the people of this country. We had other exports and we had re-exports. People may think that imports into this country, even though some of them were reexported, were not of any use to the country. That is not so. Any time there is trade doing, any time goods are coming into the country and going out again, even the same goods, there is something remaining; there are labour, employment, and wages; there are the carriers being paid; and, on the whole, it helps to keep matters going.

In 1931, as far as re-exports are concerned, we had them to the extent of £1,177,000. Last year they dropped to less than £500,000. I find here that for home consumption we had white oats and black oats. In the year 1931 we had white oats at 7/3 per cwt. and last year at 7/3 per cwt. In 1931 we had black oats at 6/2 per cwt., and last year at 6/2. Barley went up from 6/11 to 7/11. First year's hay dropped from 69/- to 59/-.

An Ceann Comhairle

Will the Deputy relate these figures to tariffs and taxation?

Mr. Brennan

I will. I have been endeavouring to show, on the lines laid down by the Minister for Industry and Commerce, that our ability to pay and our incomes will depend entirely upon the price of agricultural produce. It is obvious, of course, that agriculture, being the main industry of the country, must provide the wherewithal for purchases. I maintain that when these duties, quotas, licences, levies, and other matters were put on certain articles they depressed the people in this country to such an extent that they are not now able to buy. I think it is immaterial to a person in this country whether an article is too dear or not if he has not the money to buy it. If we are going to have in this country a continuation of quota orders, and of tariffs, a collection of £10,000,000 from Customs, as we had this year, and of £8,000,000 from Excise, and this £10,000,000 in Customs collected on a very small amount that came into this country in comparison with what was coming in before, we must at least be provided with the ability to pay for them. There is only one way in which they can be paid for—we must foster the main industry of the country; we must put it on lines on which it would pay. The smallest child going to school would have learned his lesson better with regard to these matters than some of the Fianna Fáil people have.

Is it not obvious to any person that you cannot switch the main industry of the country into channels which do not pay without a subsidy, without levies, and without protection, without losing money on it? Suppose this was a new country and that the 2,900,000 people in it to-day were brought into it and scattered over it, what would they turn their hands to? Would any person say that they ought to turn their hands to items that have to be subsidised, provided there were other activities which do not need subsidisation? I am a wheat grower and have always grown wheat for my own farm and for my own use. But why do we think it necessary to have wheat in this country if we can make more money at something else? The only reason that we think we ought to have wheat is, apparently, that we, too, in this country have been bitten by the war bug. We want to be like all the big countries and make some provision for war times. Suppose we thought all along peace lines, if this was a new country, as I say, what would we engage in? We would undoubtedly engage in that which would pay us best.

There may be, of course, and there possibly always will be, a necessity for subsidising something that you cannot do without. But, in the main, there is only one thing to do with the people of this country, and that is, mostly, let them alone. Once you get Government control, once people get into a rut, you cannot get them out of it unless the Government shows them some way out of it. They are always looking for something for nothing. That kind of control which the Government has at the present time by way of levies to certain departments of the agricultural industry is leading the country into a rut. I think the Minister for Agriculture knows that and that there is no person in the country who does not know that it is leading into a rut. What this country really wants is some person who will study the resources of the country so far as agriculture is concerned; some person or party who will regard the potentialities of this country from that point of view, see what is the most that can be made out of it, and lose no opportunity of making it.

It is a very sad commentary on the people who are at present managing the affairs of the country that while, as the Minister for Industry and Commerce tells us, so much importance attaches to our exports and while a country like Australia in the last four years could increase her exports to the British market by £28,000,000, our exports diminished by £9,000,000. There ought to be some kind of stocktaking by Fianna Fáil. There ought to be some kind of stocktaking by the Government at the present time. They ought to look back on the last four years and ought not to be afraid to take their courage into their hands even now. They ought to take up these volumes and read them. They ought to take up that very serious question of our adverse trade balance. That was dealt with very fully here the other night and I think a certain statement was made by my colleague, Deputy Dillon, in which he predicted a falling off in certain assets. I am sorry to say his prediction has come true, according to the latest publication, so that there is every evidence, as far as our adverse trade balance and our ability to met it by invisible exports are concerned, that that ability has declined. That is a very serious state of affairs.

One of the worst features of Fianna Fáil is that the Party suffers from a kind of superiority complex in regard to patriotism. I do not know why that should be but it is true. Members of that Party think that no person can think honestly about this country, in patriotic terms, except themselves. When other people try to show them the dangers which surround this country, when we try to show them, for instance, that an export trade can be very beneficial, that it ought to be fostered and husbanded, they try to make out that because of that attitude we are un-Irish, that we are Anglicised and that we are Imperialists. Mind, I do not care what you call me tomorrow, provided we have in this country, as we undoubtedly have, the right to make our own laws and make them in our own way. We have the right to add to our customs duties and nobody outside bothers about them. I would not mind what you called me to-morrow if I could do what Australia has done, if I could double my exports to the British market and if, by doubling them, I could increase the income of our people so that they would be in a position to buy the articles upon which we have imposed tariffs here. I would not care what you called me after that. You will have to get rid of that complex. You will have to recognise that the people have got to live and that the only way they can live is by being put into a position to enable them to purchase the necessaries of life.

If we are going to be so surrounded by tariffs, by levies, duties and everything else in our pursuit of that programme of self-sufficiency, God forbid that we should ever attain it because, should we succeed, what would happen? If we ever attained to what appears to be the ideal of the Government, or at least the ideal of some members of that Party—it is not the ideal of the Minister for Industry and Commerce; he has moved away from that—and if we ever came to the stage when we had acquired that self-sufficiency for this country, I tremble to think what the standard of living would be. What do you think the standard of living would be if the agriculturists of this country had nobody to buy from them except our population of 3,000,000 odd? Where do you think it would land them? What would our purchasing power be? This motion has possibly, as the Ceann Comhairle remarked, rambled somewhat far afield but that it is not a bit of harm if the Government will only take heed of the things that are being spoken of and of the things that have appeared in those Government publications. The Government must take stock of the situation, get their feet on the ground and realise that agriculture in this country must be made prosperous. You cannot make the people on the land prosperous by diminishing live stock. The only result a diminution of live stock can have is to rob the land of its fertility. It is doing that already. If you want a tillage policy of any kind for any purpose——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is proceeding to till a new field.

Mr. Brennan

If you endeavour to diminish the number of your live stock, you are simply going to reduce the fertility of the soil. If you do that, it does not matter what duties you abolish. You will be late then; the people will not be able to recover. Even with our adverse balance soaring, with our Government expenditure soaring and our ability to meet it diminishing, as all these publications show, there is yet time to think. Now is the time to consider the situation. The Government must sit up and take stock of the result of their administration for the last five years, as far as our assets are concerned. They must come to a halt with their present programme and take the advice of the people on this side of the House. To some extent, at least, they will have to mend their hand if the people are to be enabled to exist at all.

Mr. O'Leary

I have great pleasure in supporting this motion. There is no doubt that there is something radically wrong in this country. I put it up to the Government on several occasions in this House to set up a commission to investigate the conditions of the farmers, especially the small farmers of the country. I specially appealed to them some time ago when they set up a commission to investigate the question of their own allowances, and I think that people who claim to be so patriotic——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy was refused permission to raise a certain matter this evening. He may not take advantage of this debate to circumvent the decision of the Chair.

Mr. O'Leary

I do not want to do anything that is not within Standing Orders. I shall just read the question for you and then I shall leave it to you to decide whether I am justified in raising the matter on this motion. I had this question on the Order Paper to-day: "To ask the President if he will state the reasons for non-acceptance by the President, Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries of the full amount of salaries passed on June 9th in the Dáil during the period between the 1st April, 1937, and July the 20th, 1937——"

An Ceann Comhairle

That question was answered to-day. It may not be further discussed.

Mr. O'Leary

Well, I might quote from the President's reply.

An Ceann Comhairle

The question may not be discussed.

Mr. O'Leary

Well, a Chinn Comhairle, I will appeal to you to point out to me where in the Standing Orders I am debarred from putting forward this particular part of the President's statement. I think I am justified in making that appeal to you. In his reply the President says: "The statutory salaries——"

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy will not discuss that question.

Mr. O'Leary

In any case, I can say this much: there must be some reason —I suppose the increased cost of living—which has induced the President and the Ministers——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy will have to resume his seat if he cannot get away from that matter.

Mr. O'Leary

I will get away from it, but I shall rise again.

An Ceann Comhairle

On a relevant opportunity.

Mr. O'Leary

I suppose I will speak of it at the cross-roads before that opportunity arises.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair has, fortunately, no jurisdiction over Deputies at the cross-roads.

Mr. O'Leary

I think I may quote the conditions which exist in the Beara Peninsula in the West Cork constituency, and I am sorry that Deputy Murphy and Deputy O'Sullivan —the Fianna Fáil Deputy—are not in the House. I do not want to use any argument here—I have never done so—which I am not prepared to stand over, but I say that there must be something wrong when the poor people in this particular area are in the position that, for amounts as low as 10/-, they have been driven to allowing the "Flying Squad" to come and seize their property. On 9th August of this year I got a letter from a constituent of mine in which he said:

"The bailiffs are still busy. In fact they visited Reentrisk, the very poorest little fishing point in the Free State, yesterday. In this particular place, there is no such thing as land, but just little patches of from 10 to 20 square yards between rocks, and from two to four cows each; no such thing as a horse or plough. They lived on fishing at one time, but that is now gone as well. One of the unfortunates they visited is a poor woman with six young children, and her husband is in England. Those parties I mentioned in my last letter who were visited before the election and got time until 8th July were again raided on 15th July. They had to pay something on account and got a month for the balance. Of course, if they can manage to square this they will be tapped again straight for the balance up to the present. There are sheriffs' warrants in circulation for the last December gale."

On the 18th October the same constituent wrote to me and said:—

"Excuse delay in supplying information re visits of bailiffs to the district, but as the district is wide it is difficult to get accurate information from all angles. They are still busy; in fact, they pay a visit every week. They visited, as nearly as possible, 40 in the Allihies parish"—

and I would say that this is one of the poorest parts of this country—

—"30 in the Eyeries parish and 11 in Castletownbere. The amounts vary from 12/- to £13, except in one case, that of William Harrington, Castletownbere, who owed over £80. They came to three parties in my neighbourhood who are living on home assistance."

I do not want to mention names.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is raising controversial matters without having given notice to the Minister. The method of collecting land annuities does not seem to me to be related to the imposition or removal of duties or taxes.

Mr. O'Leary

It shows the conditions to which those people have been reduced as a result of Government policy, and if the Ceann Comhairle wishes evidence of that fact he can refer to the Minister for Agriculture, who was taken down there within the last two months, according to the Press, to investigate conditions there. I hope the Minister for Agriculture will come into the House this evening and tell us of his experiences in that district. The letter goes on to say:—

"Two of those have only one cow each, and the other has about two cows in a little barren holding. They also visited a fellow who is living on the blind pension, and had the grass of one cow, but sold it over a year ago. Another very outstanding case is that of a man who is in England himself; his wife is dead, and his five children—the eldest a cripple of 16 years—are at the mercy of the waves. The amount they owed was about 30/-. Those visits started about the middle of June and still continue."

As I said, a Chinn Comhairle, I do not want to take any advantage of the Government, and as the Minister for Agriculture has been in the area I hope that before this motion is decided he will come into the House and give us his experiences of the conditions existing in the particular area. If there is any doubt as to the conditions which exist in this country one has only to refer to the statement in this day's Press.

On the President's Vote this year, after he had finished his reply, I put him a question. I asked him if he had made any effort during his period of office to find out the number of young men and young women who had left this country to work in Great Britain. The President's reply was that it would not be worth while; that he would have to go into every little village and townland in order to get the figures. To-day we have them from the British Government, and we can see that over 16,000 people have emigrated this year more than last year. What is responsible for that? Must there not be some cause for that emigration from this country? There is no good in going back to 1930-31 because at that time emigration had practically ceased in this country. The point about it is that the farmer's son and the farmer's daughter in this country to-day have no hope of getting suitable wages for their work. As Deputy Brennan has pointed out, on every article that goes into the houses of those people and on every implement that they use there is a tax. Yesterday I was told that there was a tax as high as 40 per cent. on an agricultural machine which I myself required. This year I had to pay in rates £35 more than I paid last year.

I ask, then, is this not a question that should be gone into? Is there not such a thing as the capacity of the people of this country to pay? When taxation was under £20,000,000 in this country, I remember the Minister for Finance saying in this House that the country could not stand the burden of taxation. To-day he is evidently convinced that the more he spends the more prosperous the people will become. Does anybody in this House consider that, by piling up debts, you are going to help prosperity? Is it the wish of any father or mother to pile up a debt in their business and leave their children to pay it off or get out? That is the kind of gerrymandering we have in this country to-day. There is evidently something wrong. I have spoken on this matter over and over again, and I do not wish to take up the time of the House for long now, but I would again appeal to the President and the Government on this matter now that they have set up a Commission to investigate the question of their own allowances. Two years ago anything over £1,000 was too much, but to-day they have helped themselves——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy will resume his seat.

Mr. O'Leary

But A Chinn Comhairle——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy must resume his seat.

Mr. O'Leary

I believe I am justified in raising this matter on this motion, and I demand my right.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy will now sit down.

Mr. O'Leary

Am I not justified in pointing out here that the Ministers may have some reason in consequence of which they are satisfied they cannot live on the salaries they accepted when they came into office?

An Ceann Comhairle

I must ask the Deputy to withdraw from the House for flouting the authority of the Chair.

Mr. O'Leary

Beidh lá eile againn. Is searbh é an fhirinne.

(Deputy O'Leary withdrew.)

Mr. J.P. Kelly

The proposer of this motion, and those on the Fine Gael Benches who spoke to the motion, have failed to produce figures to prove that the items in the household budget have been increased to the detriment of the community and the country. Now, no general statement can convince us that the policy the Government are pursuing has not been successful. We must consider what effect a levy or a tax will have upon the well-being of our people. We must consider whether it is for good or ill that each burden is placed on the community. It is true that there has been a marked improvement in the standard of living in this country for the past few years. More money is in circulation, as a result of the tariff policy introduced by the Government, to purchase goods for the household, and, even though prices may have increased in the case of certain commodities, I hold that the increases for the most part have been justified by the increased wealth that has accrued to the people.

The Opposition place no value on the higher standard of living. They make no allowance for the extra employment given to our people. Neither do they make allowance for the fact that we are growing wholesome food, and that the health of our people has improved as a result of that wholesome food.

When he was introducing this motion Deputy Morrissey spoke in very general terms. He did not analyse any of the figures for us. He spoke generally about the amount of tariffs collected at our ports. There is one matter he did speak about to which I would like to refer. He is reported in column 212 of the Official Debates as having said: "...if the actual cash prices of boots and shoes in this country are being kept down, the quality is not being kept up." There we have an admission that there has been no increase in the price of boots and shoes.

Mr. Morrissey

Did I say that?

Mr. Kelly

It is implied, if not actually stated. The Deputy said: "If the actual cash prices of boots and shoes in this country are being kept down." I do not speak for the boot and shoe industry of the Saorstát, but I do speak from my own knowledge, and I can inform Deputy Morrissey, and anyone who thinks with him, that the boot and shoe trade has improved wonderfully here since the advent of the present Government.

Mr. Keating

Is it in quality?

Mr. Kelly

I can speak for the shoe factory in my own county, in Kells. The shoes have come into my own household, so I can speak from my own knowledge. I can say that the shoes there give longer wear and they are cheaper to purchase than what we formerly purchased from across the water. I can speak from my own knowledge of the Mocassin Boot Company in Kilkenny, because I wear the shoe, and there again the boots and shoes are more durable, they have better material and are more comfortable than any that I got from across the water heretofore. I can speak for Donaghy's and Woodington's shoe factories in the town of Drogheda, and I can say that the shoes produced there are a credit to any Irish factory, and the quality is kept up; not alone is the quality equal to what we got heretofore, but if anything it is much better.

Mr. McGowan

How about the wages paid in those factories?

Mr. Kelly

Deputy Morrissey was having a tilt at Irish industries.

Mr. Morrissey

There are a couple of shoe factories in my own constituency.

Mr. Kelly

The Deputy makes no mention of the better materials that are being used, the better wearing stuff, and the consequent economy to the household by purchasing these shoes which wear longer. When proposing the motion Deputy Morrissey said: "So far as I am concerned, the acid test of the value of any industry to this country is the improvement it will make in employment of this country, and, unfortunately, so far as we can see, there has been no improvement in that respect." Of course, if Deputy Morrissey does not want to see, it is not in my power to make him see, but no matter where I look for figures I find there has been an improvement and a great improvement. If we turn to the report dealing with the production of the 23 industries, we find that between 1932 and 1935 the net output increased by £4,345,000; the wages increased by £1,707,000, and the persons employed increased by 23,185. The report states that although production increased, the price of the goods increased by only 2 per cent.

The preliminary figures for 1936 are also available, and they show the same rapid progress. They show an increase of 12 per cent. in the net output of the 23 industries, 9 per cent. increase in the persons engaged, and 11 per cent. in the wages paid. I give an invitation to Deputy Morrissey to apply his acid test to the figures I have quoted. Of course, if his political bias will not prevent him seeing the improvement that is there, perhaps when he next speaks upon a subject such as this he will own to the facts. Of course, the Deputy objected to anyone on this side saying that he was trying to sabotage Irish industries. But I do not know of any other name or fancy name that we could use to describe accurately the attitude he has taken up with regard to Irish industry. Sabotage is the only name that fits in, and I believe that sabotage it is and sabotage it will remain.

When we purchase foreign goods for our households, it stands to reason we are sending money out of the country and that we will have no money at home to purchase these goods. By purchasing Irish goods we are keeping money at home, and consequently we have more money in circulation. When speaking on this motion Deputy Dillon said that every other country was booming, or that it was right high on a wave of prosperity, and that this was particularly so in the case of Britain, with whom we have the closest contact, as he said. Very well, here again we have a mere statement, but a statement that does not convey facts. The official returns for England, if we look at the Board of Trade returns, show that food is now 18½ per cent. dearer than it was in 1933. Potatoes are up by 43 per cent.; tea by 21 per cent.; eggs by 20 per cent.; bacon 29 per cent., and bread 31 per cent. There is a great boom of prosperity in England. Of course it has brought high prices in its trail. But all is not so rosy in England as Deputy Dillon painted it. We have soaring prices there, and according to a leading article in the Daily Express of yesterday's date we read that for every man in Britain now living on the soil, there is another man now living on the dole. We read the comment of the Daily Express on that. That was written by an Englishman in an English paper for English readers. Deputy Dillon will not say that that is not correct, yet that is what we are expected to join in with——

Mr. Morrissey

In the last three years 79,000 of our people had to join in with it.

Mr. Kelly

I will now compare prices here in our own country. With regard to prices, the most important item is food. We have here a return given by the Minister for Industry and Commerce, in reply to a question published in the Dáil Debates on the 27th October. We find that household flour and baker's bread have increased in price. I do not intend to discuss that matter, because it is quite obvious to everyone that an increase has taken place there. The Minister has stated that it is his intention to investigate the matter. The knowledge that he has taken it in hands is sufficient to induce me to say that the position in that particular matter will be improved. I am not denying that there has been an increase in the price of baker's bread. But when we examine other figures we find very illuminating reading indeed. We find that in Dublin there has been no increase from 1931 to 1937 in the price of tea. There has been no increase in the price of sugar, hen eggs, beef or mutton. There has been a reduction in the price of milk, potatoes and creamery butter. There has been an increase in the price of Irish streaky bacon and coals. If we turn to the country areas and take the town of Drogheda, adjacent to which I live, we find that, while the price of household flour and of baker's bread has increased all over the country, in Drogheda there has been no increase in the price of coal from 1931 to 1937; no increase in the price of sugar, hen eggs, Irish bacon, beef or mutton. There has been a reduction in the price of creamery butter, potatoes and fresh milk. Deputies who are interested in Tralee, at the other end of the country, will find there a reduction in the price of mutton, beef, creamery butter, fresh milk and coals. These figures go to prove that many of the items which go to make up the family budget have not increased to the extent claimed by the Opposition. Making a statement is one thing, but proving it is another. We have here before us statistics and they are accurate statistics.

Deputy Dillon told us that steps could be taken over-night to restore the national economy and bring down prices of foodstuffs and other household requisites. He said there was a formula that would save our faces and save the faces on all sides if we would merely compromise with England. It was on that he fought the general election and it was on that he brought back 48 Deputies here. A settlement of the question with England would not bring down the cost of living. The cost of living is high in England, higher than it is here.

Mr. Morrissey

What!

Mr. Kelly

The cost of living has increased by a higher percentage during the past year in England than it has here. That being so, we would if we compromised with England, if we believe Deputy Dillon, have a high figure for the cost of living in England, while for love of us here in this country, England would allow us a low figure for our cost of living. It is nonsensical to argue that one figure could operate in England and another here if we were to compromise with England. Of course, the restoration of our national policy does not mean the restoration of Empire policy nor Empire economy. Now, what do we find in the North of Ireland, where they enjoy all that is to be got from friendship with England, where they have the national economy of England? We find statements made there during the past few days and reported in the Daily Express——

Mr. Morrissey

Oh, oh! The Daily Express again.

Mr. Kelly

This is not against the Deputy. At present Belfast is building a 10,000 ton ship, and it happens at the same time that a 23,000 ton aircraft cruiser is being built there also. On the cruiser £2,000,000 is being spent, and on the aircraft carrier the expenditure is £3,000,000. More than 13,000 men are now steadily employed at shipbuilding work in Belfast. So there the shipbuilding trade is in full blast, and 13,000 men have constant employment in shipbuilding. Yet what do we find? We find when Parliament was being prorogued there last week, Mr. Henderson, an Independent member, stating that he did not want to create any dissension there, because that would not be for the benefit of the House, but he protested against the number of starving people who are left unprovided for, and he demanded from the acting Prime Minister a ray of hope for the unemployed people of Belfast. He said there were thousands of young men with no opportunity of finding employment. Mr. Beattie said that England was enjoying temporary prosperity due to the re-armament boom, but the Six Counties had not enjoyed any of that prosperity. He added that they cannot certainly be called upon to take part in the depression when it comes as a reaction to the present boom. To show that the Government was doing all that was possible, Mr. Andrews, the Acting Prime Minister, said the Government was spending money on relief schemes, grants to new industries, and everything that was possible for them to do——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy's statements may be very interesting, but I do not know how they relate to the operation of taxation.

Mr. Kelly

Deputy Dillon told us that all our taxes would be reduced if we adopted the same attitude as they adopted in the North of Ireland—if we compromised with England.

An Ceann Comhairle

Compromise has nothing to do with this motion.

Mr. Morrissey

The Government have done that already, and they will be compromising again in a month's time.

Mr. Kelly

One would imagine that we were the only nation in the world which was adopting this system of taxes, levies, duties and like impositions on our foodstuffs. There is hardly a nation in the world which is not, in some way, protecting the interests of its own people. We are putting on these taxes, levies, and duties with a certain object—to foster the industrial and agricultural interests of our country. Deputy Dillon told us that our industries were not contributing to the wealth of the people. Is it not gratifying to find that the investing public do not share Deputy Dillon's views as to the prospects of our industries? During the past few months we have had evidence of what the Irish investing public think of our new industries. All these industries are being established with one object—that is, when they come into full production later, to keep down the cost of living. The issues of capital made by certain companies during the past few months have been subscribed seven or eight times over a few minutes after the opening of the lists. That, in itself, proves that the Irish people believe in the future of our industries, because the investing public are not fools. Of course, our industries must be protected by taxes and duties. If we are to go ahead with our industrialisation, we must have that protection. In that, we are at one with other progressive countries at the present time.

The Opposition say that we are proceeding too fast with our policy of industrialisation. I suppose they believe we are going too fast to permit them even to hope that, at some time, they will be able to stand up and tell the Irish people that they will change the whole system. The Irish people will not stand for a change of the system. They know that the duties, taxes and levies imposed by the present Government are for the people's benefit and are imposed to help Irish industry. Deputies spoke of the numbers who are going over to England. They taunt us with the number of migrants going to that country. We have to prepare for the day when these men and women will come back.

Mr. Gorey

Keep the workhouses in repair, then.

Mr. Kelly

We know that this wave of prosperity in England, which Deputy Dillon and other speakers have told us about, is transient. We know that it is brought about not by any increase in the fundamental industries of England but by the re-armament race. There is no better way to prepare for the return of these people than to produce our food and manufacture our own materials. Heretofore, when Cumann na nGaedheal were in office, the people emigrated to America and did not come back. Many of them were lost in the slums of New York. They had not the money to bring them back. Those people who have crossed to England will come back, and it is up to us to prepare the way for them. We are not going too fast with our policy of industrialisation and it is up to Deputies on the opposite side, instead of trying to find little items they can throw up against our industries, to lend a hand in trying to meet the situation. It would be better for them to throw their weight in behind the effort that is being made to industrialise the country.

We should remember that our industries cannot reach their maximum output in a year. Neither can they give maximum employment in that time. Perhaps, some of them will not be able to pay the maximum wage in that time. It is our duty as Deputies, and it is the duty of the Government, to assist them in every way possible. The Government are to be commended for what they have done. They have done a great deal for Irish industry and they will do a great deal more. They are only starting in regard to this matter. We have not touched upon the raw materials of this country. There are much greater possibilities in the exploitation of our raw materials. A great deal remains to be done and Deputies should be willing to assist in the doing of it. If we were to take off these duties and taxes, what would happen? We should have this country the dumping ground for the subsidised surpluses of all the countries of the world. Are the people going to stand for that? They are not. Are the people going to stand for what the Opposition Party would bring upon us if the Dáil were to pass this motion? They would bring about the ruin of our agricultural and industrial activities. They would bring about desolation and starvation. The people will not stand for that. They gave their answer at the last election.

Mr. Morrissey

Hence the minority Government.

Mr. McGovern

It is not necessary to say much on this motion, because no attempt has been made on the part of the Government Party to answer the case which has been put forward from this side. The Deputy who has sat down went over the same old, beaten track. He told us about the good intentions of the Fianna Fáil Party. Nobody denies that they meant the best when putting on these tariffs and other impositions. I do not grudge them the credit due for good intentions. They are, however, beginning to find out that things are not working according to plan and that their hopes are not coming to fruition, as we all desired they would. Unfortunately, it was easy for people who had an understanding of economics to foresee the result. These efforts could not be successful so long as the principal industry, which was able to stand on its own feet, was being crippled. Not only was it able to stand on its own feet but it had to help to carry the others. They are all in the same boat now. We have no industry able to stand on its own feet at present. Each is leaning against the other and all must sooner or later give way. It is like a house of cards; some day it must come down. It is all very well for Deputy Kelly to tell us about the improved standard of living and about the increase of employment. If a test of that is wanted, it is to be found in the fact that people are running away from this high standard of living, that they are running away from this great employment and seeking work elsewhere which they did not do in the years preceding the change of Government.

Before that time they had America, a great country, a country where there was extraordinary prosperity for some years previous to 1929, to fly to. They have not that great country to fly to now, so they are flying—where? They are flying to the country with which we are supposed to be carrying on a war, the country which we were told was unable to buy our produce and the country which we were told we had beaten to her knees in an economic war. They are flying there in their thousands at a rate which is increasing from month to month. The figures must be abnormal because we who live near the Border know that there are more going across to Northern Ireland and Great Britain at present than there are going out of half the rest of the Free State.

Deputy Kelly also told us that he knew from his own knowledge the value that was to be got in buying shoes and other things in this country. I, who live within a mile or two of the Border, have some personal knowledge also. I am every day in the week communicating with the Revenue Commissioners and asking them to consider the terrible circumstances of some unfortunate creature who has been captured smuggling second-hand clothing from Northern Ireland and smuggling second-hand shoes and other necessaries of life, which they are unable to buy in their own country, across the Border. Will somebody on the Fianna Fáil side tell us why these people are taking such risks if they can get better value and cheaper prices here and if they are so prosperous that they can buy them here?

Mr. Kelly

Second-hand goods.

Mr. McGovern

If any Deputy wants them, I can give facts and figures to him, not publicly but privately. That is the prosperity we have. What is the use of getting up here and bluffing the House and the country, throwing dust in the people's eyes, and trying to make them believe what you know cannot be true? Anybody near the Border knows conditions as they are.

Deputy Dillon went into the economic position and dealt with it very clearly. He dealt with the imports and exports, both visible and invisible, and with the adverse trade balance in a very clear and exhaustive manner. He showed very clearly the indications of decreasing prosperity and the melting away of capital and wealth in this country. He pointed to the adverse trade balance growing from year to year, and pointed out that the external assets of this country, which were something comparable to the bullion kept by the international banks of other countries, were melting away. He furnished the figures and yet his facts have not been answered. Deputy Moore got up immediately after and made an attempt to answer them. What was his answer? He said: "If that is so, how is it that nobody has come along to tell us until Deputy Dillon told us?" That is it; it does not do for an Irishman on this side to point out the facts, to open the map and let them see the facts. Deputy Moore, who above all men on that side understood what Deputy Dillon was at, was the man who got up and asked why, if that was so, did somebody from England or elsewhere, or the Daily Express as Deputy Kelly mentioned, not tell us before this? If Deputy Moore would read The Economist, he would find it pointed out time and again and The Economist is a paper whose authority nobody on that side will question. He could have seen it in The Economist, a British authority, and could also have heard it from people who were competent to speak on it.

Deputy Moore spends a good deal of time in the Library, like Deputy Corry, but his purpose is to find something to prove that black is white and white is yellow and not to find facts. Deputy Moore reminds me of the man who came up from the country and was brought by a friend to the Zoo. He saw a giraffe and his friend said: "Paddy, what do you think of that animal?" and the man said: "I think there is no such animal as that. I do not believe it." So it is with Deputy Moore. The things were put plainly before his eyes and yet he did not believe them. That is the attitude of a great many Fianna Fáil Deputies. They will not acknowledge the facts and will make no attempt to meet the position. Deputy Moore went around the world instead of looking for facts in his own country. He took an excursion over to Canada and gave us a statement of some gentleman from that or some other country with regard to the conditions in Canada and with regard to the weeds and pests that had got into Manitoba because of wheat growing. If, instead of sitting in his armchair listening to the radio, the Deputy had gone to the farmers' meeting in Wicklow, to which he was invited, he would have got people who could tell him about similar conditions here and give him first hand information. That was the place to which he should have gone to hear something from the farmers.

The Deputy also took an excursion over to France and he told us how they had to suspend the 40-hour week there because of soaring prices, claims for increased wages and strikes. He told us of conditions in France exactly the same as we have in the Free State. We have a lower standard of living due to the increase in the price of our manufactured articles and the scarcity of money to meet it; and the fact that people are unable to buy the necessaries of life owing to the increase in prices is equivalent to a reduction in their wages. Therefore, they strike for higher wages. You have every class in the State looking for an increase in wages or salaries. What is the case they put up? The case is that it is due to increased cost of living. Who can deny that there is an increased cost of living? It is admitted, of course, by the Fianna Fáil members themselves that there is an increased cost of living, that there is a justification for such strikes and that there is a justification for claims by every section of the State, no matter of what class. If we look even at the Front Bench opposite, we find that they are looking for an increase and setting a headline——

An Ceann Comhairle

In this debate a Deputy has been forbidden to discuss that matter. Deputy McGovern may not discuss it.

Mr. McGovern

I am sorry, Sir; I make only a passing reference to it. I am dealing with the general standard of living, and with the position of all classes in the State. I do not want to refer to that any further. They are looking for an increase and they must get it, in some cases. For instance, agricultural labourers must get an increase, because they could not live on their wages. When the increase is given the position will be that those who are manufacturing under high tariffs, amounting to 75 per cent. or even 100 per cent., will have the right and the privilege to increase their prices, in order to compensate themselves and to meet the increased cost of production arising out of the higher wages. That will increase prices, which will then go still higher. There will be another strike for still higher wages to meet the increased cost of living, which really amounts to a reduction in wages, and so the vicious circle works and prices and costs keep chasing each other. As Deputy Moore pointed out, that is what they were doing in France. The difference is that in France they have some statesmen of experience. France is an old country. It built up its wealth and has been governing itself for hundreds of years. Unfortunately, we have not had that experience. France with that experience, and with its statesmen, could see what was coming and rose to its responsibilities. They saw that they made mistakes and that they must try to remedy them, as otherwise the franc would go down, just as our pound would go down if it was not pegged to the British pound.

A Deputy

Where is the franc now?

Mr. McGovern

France had to turn to the United States of America and to England in order to get stability in the franc. The French made some effort to change conditions that were bringing about the collapse of France and driving it downhill. Deputy Moore by pointing to France and what happened there has strengthened the case for this motion. The motion shows that we want to do something. That is outlined in the motion. It is the only thing that we see the Government is able to do with any hope of bringing about a change for the better. We were told about the prosperity there is in England, and how that prosperity is due to the borrowing of £80,000,000 to be spent on rearmament. Although we have not an army or a navy — only the "Muirchu"—are we not borrowing? On the ratio of 55 to 1, £80,000,000 to England represented less than £1,500,000 to us. Are we not borrowing more than that every year, and spending it on various schemes, merely for the purpose of giving employment to our people? We are spending more in proportion to our position than Great Britain, who is spending on her army and her navy in order to be prepared for a world war, if necessary. We have hardly any army and no navy, yet 80,000 people left the country, and we have a decreased population, discontent, and everyone complaining. People are striking everywhere because conditions are unbearable, yet we are told from the opposite benches about the prosperity that is here. The thing is too ridiculous and too absurd. The country cannot to bluffed much longer. As the people are beginning to realise the truth, I do not think it is necessary to stress that aspect any further. There was no speech made on the opposite benches that did not strengthen the case for this motion.

Last week I listened to the Minister for Industry and Commerce speaking for about an hour and a half, during which he raised the smoke screen of tariffs in order to conceal facts. In spite of the smoke screen the facts came through for all who wanted to see the truth. There is no use trying to conceal the truth, because it will find a way out somewhere. I will quote what the Minister for Industry and Commerce said, and if that does not prove what Deputy Morrissey and Deputies on this side set out to prove, I will sit down. If they do not disprove what the Minister for Industry and Commerce wanted to prove, then I give it up. The case made for the motion was that the standard of living had been lowered. Speaking here on October 20th, the Minister for Industry and Commerce, according to the Official Debates, page 543, said:

"A reduction in the price of commodities, particularly for a community like ours, one half of whom get their livelihood from the land, might mean a very serious diminution of the standard of living of those people employed in agriculture and the average standard of living for the whole country."

Could anything be plainer than that? A reduction in the price of agricultural produce will mean a very serious reduction in the standard of living of the people in the industry and a reduction in the standard of living of the whole community. When trying to prove another point the Minister trusted to the shortness of the people's memory, as he stated in the same speech:—

"So far as food is concerned, I can say in respect of beef, mutton, milk, pork and potatoes that the national average retail prices now prevailing are lower than they were in 1931."

There we have it proved out of the Minister's own mouth that the standard of living has been reduced. He told us earlier in his speech that if they were reduced in price, it would mean a reduction in the standard of living of all engaged in agriculture and of the whole community. The Minister tells us that prices have been reduced, and he boasted about it in that speech. Is there any need to say more? I leave it at that. He has proved our case.

Mr. Corry

I find it very difficult to speak on this motion, because I do not believe that the Deputies opposite are serious. If they were I must be suffering from some kind of mental aberration. (Motion quoted). If all taxes, levies, duties, impositions on foodstuffs, and other necessaries of life are to be reduced, I should like to hear the position explained by some of the Deputies on the opposite benches. I have not yet heard from them what that would mean. If they mean to abolish all duties on the necessaries of life, will Deputy Morrissey tell us if it would be lowering the standard of living of the people if they were deprived of their "half-one." I take it that the duty on whiskey is to be abolished under this motion.

A Deputy

Hear, hear.

Mr. Corry

A Deputy says "Hear, hear." I ask if the duty on stout and porter is to be abolished. Of course the duty on tobacco must go. If all these duties are abolished forthwith we would have a great country! That is what this motion means. I have not heard any other explanation. Many people would then consider that their standard of living would be reduced. Yet the duty, the tax, or the levy on articles in which they are interested is to be abolished forthwith! I am sure you would get a lot of people to say that a drop of whiskey was a necessity of life for them, and if that were found to be so then you would get Deputy Morrissey and Deputy Linehan over on the other side to say that there should be no duty on whiskey. It all depends on what you consider to be a necessity of life.

Mr. Linehan

It is not one of the Fianna Fáil duties, and it has not raised the cost of living.

Mr. Corry

There is no statement in this about it being a Fianna Fáil duty or any other duty.

Mr. Linehan

It has not raised the cost of living. Could Deputy Corry say what the duty on whiskey was in 1931 and in 1937, and then take a few of the other figures and compare them with the duty on whiskey between the two years I have mentioned?

Mr. Corry

I need only go down to Deputy Linehan's constituency——

Mr. Linehan

For what?

Mr. Corry

——and ask him if he is agreeable to this: that through certain Governmental action £1,662,000 worth of flour was, following the imposition of an import duty, prohibited from coming into this country, and that as a consequence of that two flour mills in the Deputy's constituency are now working full time. They are working full time as a result of that action taken by the present Government. Is Deputy Linehan prepared to go back to the flour-mill workers at Clondulane and tell them that he is supporting a motion in this House the purpose of which is to nullify the action taken by this Government which led to the reopening of those two mills? Those two mills, remember, which were closed down in 1931 owing to the action of the previous Government, have since been reopened by the action of this Government. Is he prepared to go down to the flour-mill workers in Clondulane and tell them that he is supporting a motion in the Dáil the object of which is to withdraw the facilities which led to the reopening of the Clondulane and other flour mills in this country? Is he prepared to go down to the flour-mill workers in Mallow and tell them that?

Mr. Linehan

No; why should I?

Mr. Corry

Is he prepared to go down to Mallow and tell the flour-mill workers there that they are going to be put back into the position they were in when Fianna Fáil came into office in 1932, when they were working only two days a week?

Mr. Linehan

What are they working now?

Mr. Corry

They are working overtime. They are working the full six days and over time. With regard to the Clondulane flour mills, I remember seeing five different questions on the Order Paper by the late Deputy John Daly for East Cork, at the time they were closed down, making an appeal for their reopening. Is Deputy Daly's son, who is now a member of the House, going to walk into the Lobby and vote for the closing down again of those flour mills which have been reopened by the action of this Government? Is he prepared to support this motion and vote in the Lobby for the removal of the levies, duties or other impositions that have enabled those flour mills to be reopened? I hope to hear the Deputies opposite get up here and justify their action, and then go down to the workers in Mallow and Clondulane and tell them point blank that they walked into the Lobby to make them hungry men again.

Deputies opposite are well aware that flour cannot be imported into this country now except under licence. If this motion were passed by the House it would mean the removal of the prohibition. The authors of this motion did not know what they were doing when they drew it up. I think it must have been drawn up some time after midnight. I do not think that Deputy Morrissey knew what it meant until I told him. I am surprised that people who talk about wasting money and wasting the time of this House would put down on the Order Paper such an idiotic motion. All that I can say is: "God give them sense." There ought to be some house built for people such as we have on the opposite side.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy should address the Chair.

Mr. Corry

I apologise. That is number one of their proposals. Their second proposal is that they are going to go down to the farmers and tell them that they are again going to allow in free of duty Chinese or other foreign bacon to the value of £1,420,000 —in other words, that 62,000 cwts. of hairy heads are going to be dumped in here on the Irish people in competition with the production of the Irish farmer. That was the value of the foreign bacon that was being imported into this country under the previous Government in 1931, and that is what the Deputies opposite want to have dumped on the Irish people again in competition with the production of the Irish farmer.

Mr. Morrissey

Will the Deputy answer this question? How does pig production in this country to-day compare with the figures for 1931?

Mr. Corry

I will.

Mr. Morrissey

There were more pigs being produced in this country in 1931 than there are to-day.

Mr. Corry

I knew there was something wrong with you: that when you put down this motion you were seeing double.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I have already told the Deputy that he should address the Chair.

Mr. Corry

And I must ask you, a Leas-Chinn Comhairle, to prevent these unseemly interruptions.

Mr. Morrissey

They are rather annoying to the Deputy, I know.

Mr. Corry

I can assure you that I am not the least annoyed. I have given certain figures to the House and the figures were never contradicted. I pointed out that the Irish farmer had got for his pigs in the year 1935— which was the nearest year I could come to at the time—over £2,000,000 more than in 1931. Deputies can go down now to the Library and find out that for themselves. I am amazed at Deputy McGovern's statement here to-night, and I suggest that if he would only spend one half-hour in the Library downstairs, and study his figures before he comes up here, he would not come up here and speak at all on these matters, because he would be afraid to do so.

Mr. McGovern

I was telling the truth.

Mr. Corry

Now I listened to Deputy McGovern when he was speaking, but I do not want Deputies to come in here and display the kind of ignorance that has been displayed in the last half-hour on this subject. That is why I appeal to Deputy McGovern and other Deputies on that side to go down there to the Library and study the figures. I suggest to Deputy McGovern that, if he does so, he will come back a sadder and a wiser man. That, however, is the trouble with Deputies opposite. They will not study anything. They just come in here and —God help us!—well, there is no use in talking about it.

A Deputy

That is right.

Mr. Corry

They will not study anything, but they will coolly come up here and talk about the poor farmer and the plight he is in, and at the same time they will bring in a motion the effect of which would be to dump in the produce of foreigners on the market of our own Irish farmers.

Mr. McGovern

What about the hens now?

Mr. Corry

Yes, what about the hens? There were £10,000 worth of hens brought in here in 1931. If Deputy McGovern will study his statistics in the Library he will find that out. However, as I have said already, that is what is wrong with Deputies opposite. They come along here and speak without having studied the problem about which they are speaking. For instance, they want to remove the tariff or licence, or whatever it is, that is preventing the free importation of foreign maize, and they want the Irish farmer, who got 18/- for his barley the other day, to go back to the former conditions when there was that free importation and where, as a result, he could not get a decent price. They even want him to go back a step further and be in the position where he could not sell his produce at all. That is what they want. That is what they are looking for. They want to get back again to the position that obtained in 1931 and 1932, when every Deputy in this House, whether from my constituency or anywhere else, saw the unfortunate farmers with their carts lined up at Ballinacurra and other such places and where they were told that they could bring their produce back again because there was no market for it.

Mr. Fagan

What about 1934?

Mr. Corry

Yes, there was a change then.

Mr. Fagan

You will never forget it.

Mr. Corry

There was a change then, and a bigger one in 1935 and 1936.

Mr. Fagan

There would want to be, and you will never forget it.

Mr. Corry

And when the brewers opened the price last year at 14/9, representatives of the farmers were able to walk up to them and make them increase it by ?, and this year they were able to make them put it up to 18/-. They made them do it.

Mr. Fagan

But they had not the profit.

Mr. Corry

That is the trouble with the Deputies over there.

Mr. Fagan

There is trouble all right.

Mr. Corry

That is the trouble with the Deputies over there, who never did anything except to watch the bullocks fattening. They cannot talk about production because they never knew anything about it.

Mr. Fagan

We can. We know every article we produce.

Mr. Corry

What does the Deputy know about the production of barley?

Mr. Fagan

You do not know anything about it.

Mr. Corry

They blame the Minister because wheat is green in November— Deputies who never grew it.

Mr. Fagan

We will teach you a lesson.

Mr. Corry

That is their trouble.

Mr. Fagan

We will teach you a lesson.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Corry should be allowed to speak without so many interruptions.

Mr. Corry

Those are the matters Deputies are dealing with, and they are the materials that Deputies are drawing out here for us to consider— the lowering of the standard of living, and so on. I wonder where the standard of living is lowered? Evidently they are blaming the high cost of foodstuffs on the Government and saying it is due to Government action. Some of it, probably, is due to Government action, but I had to give another object lesson to Deputies here a few weeks ago, when I pointed out to them that, when the foreign wheat was being imported here, at 30/- per barrel, there was a complaint because the price of flour here, made from that foreign wheat and home-grown wheat, was 51/6, and I had to point out to Deputies that the price of the 4-lb. loaf was 1/-. I had to point out that, in 1926, which was the last time where I could find anything in that connection, the price of foreign wheat was 30/- and the price paid to the foreigner for flour was 62/6 a sack, and the price of the 4-lb. loaf then was 1/-. Those are circumstances that no Deputy can get behind. That was the time when you paid the foreigner £1,555,000 for flour, or rather £1,662,000, and that is why I say Deputies over there have no case whatever, because, according to the report of the commission which sat at that period and out of which I have read extracts for Deputies, if the baker in this country worked the same number of hours and gave the same return for his work as the baker, for instance, in Northern Ireland or England, the price would be reduced by a farthing per 4-lb. loaf. That was one instance. I gave another instance, when I pointed out that more was paid in this country to the mill workers than in England, and that, despite the fact that we were paying more to our mill workers than the mill workers were being paid in Liverpool and other places in England, the fact remained——

Mr. D. Morrissey

What fact?

Mr. Corry

The fact that in 1926, the last period in which the price of foreign wheat was 30/- a barrel, the foreigner imported flour at that time at 52/6. You are getting it now at 51/6, I understand—that is, 1/- less.

Mr. D. Morrissey

It is 10/- a sack more than in England.

Mr. Corry

I am not discussing what it is in England at the moment, but I can say this much at the moment: that if there is profiteering at the present day on the part of the flour millers, what kind of profiteering must there have been in 1926 on the part of the foreign flour millers? And that was the period when the previous Government left the people of this country at the mercy of these people? There may be profiteering now, but what kind of profiteering must there have been then? If the Irish mill worker is being paid more than 6/- a week over what the mill worker is paid in Liverpool, and if, despite that fact, there is the same basic price for wheat, then undoubtedly there must have been terrible profiteering at that time, and Deputies opposite who were the Government at that time were definitely responsible for allowing that profiteering to go on and for making no attempt to rectify it. It only shows what would happen if Deputies succeeded in passing this motion and in wiping out the flour mills and putting us again at the mercy of the foreign flour millers. If foreign wheat came in at 30/- or 20/-, it did not matter what the price was, you would have to pay whatever the English millers liked to charge you for the flour. These are facts no Deputy can contradict. That was the condition of affairs for a long period.

We had an arraignment from Deputy Dillon last week in connection with the woollen industry. His complaint was that 600 Irish people were going to be paid for working in a mill at Tullamore instead of paying 600 English workers for preparing the yarn for us. Then, if we let that state of affairs continue, we will have Deputy McGovern telling us how the people were running to England for employment.

Mr. McGovern

You are misrepresenting Deputy Dillon.

Mr. Corry

Under that proposal of the Minister for Industry and Commerce there are going to be 600 people employed here; that is 600 people off the dole and kept at home who, otherwise, would have to go abroad for employment. Deputies cannot see that, or at least will not see that. Perhaps they think it would make better capital for them to be able to say that there are 600 more unemployed; that they would rather have that to use as political propaganda than have the people working. To my mind that is the truth of the story. Deputies opposite have got to that frame of mind that they would prefer to be able to say, for political propaganda purposes, that there are so many unemployed here, rather than see an industry started here that would give employment to our own people.

Mr. Morrissey

That is the sort of propaganda you use.

Mr. Corry

That is the kind of propaganda the Deputy uses in and out.

Mr. Morrissey

Unfortunately, we have too much of it.

Mr. Corry

The Deputy wants to make more of it. The Deputy is not satisfied with the unemployment figures to-day. The Deputy wants to drive the flour mill workers out to walk the streets where he had them in 1932. We know the kind of tariffs that were imposed at that time and the way they were worked up and down. I had to give an instance here to the former Minister for Industry and Commerce on one occasion when he put a 25 per cent. tariff on waterproof clothing and a 50 per cent. on the cloth required for making that clothing, which was not made in this country at all, and let the unfortunate manufacturers pay 50 per cent. on the cloth they brought in and, with a 25 per cent. tariff, enter into competition with the foreign manufacturers of the articles. That is the kind of tariff that closed down the factories and which the Deputies evidently want again. I do not know really what they want. No sane man, reading the notice of motion, could know what they want. They complain of the lower standard of living through the operation of taxes, levies, duties, and like impositions on foodstuffs and other necessaries of life. Foodstuffs are not the only necessaries of life.

Mr. Morrissey

The motion does not say they are.

Mr. Corry

No, but we can visualise what some people would think they are. I should like to hear either Deputy McGilligan or Deputy Morrissey, who claim joint responsibility for this motion and put their names to it, tell us in plain simple language what they want before they discuss this motion further. Let some of them get up and tell us what they want, what necessaries of life are to be included in this as being free of duty and taxes. They should let us know if the brewing industry is to be free of taxes and if the distilling industry is to be free of taxes. They should let us know if the duty on tobacco is to be wiped out. They should let us know all these matters and then the Dáil will know what it has to face up to, and will know where it is going to get its revenue to run the country.

When the Deputy has done that he can go down the country and tell the people where he is going to get the £5,000,000 which he is going to pay England annually when he gets back; what particular revenue he is going to get that out of. The Deputy can do all these things. He can tell the national teachers where he is going to get the money to increase their salaries and the Civic Guards where he is going to get the money to increase their pay. He can tell the people where he will get the money for the other motions fathered by various Deputies; where he will get the increased salaries arising out of arbitration for the Civil Service, for instance. He can tell them were he is going to get this money when all the duties have been wiped out. I should like to hear this motion definitely and properly explained so that we may know where we are. Anybody reading it would say that it was written at midnight by some man who was by no means sane.

Mr. Morrissey

It would be a relief to the House if somebody would explain to the Deputy, because he obviously knows nothing about it.

Mr. Corry

It is evident that the Deputy had not the least notion of what he was signing. If he had he would not have done it. If the Deputy had any notion of what he was signing his name to, he would not have signed it. It is the most ridiculous motion ever brought before the House, and I am amazed that the Deputy, who thinks he is a responsible Deputy, should have signed his name to it. I am sure that Deputy Morrissey, if anyone said he was not responsible, would get very sore, and still he signed his name to this. What else do Deputies want to do? The Deputies are now going to tell the farmers who are growing beet that they are to grow no more of it. They are going to go a step further and tell the four beet factories established in this country that they can now close down.

Mr. Gorey

Choke the white elephants.

Mr. Corry

The Deputy is fond of red elephants. That is the trouble. That is definitely contained in this motion, and these are the things I want Deputies to think over in their cooler moments. Whoever was foolish enough to send such Deputies into this House, I am sure they did not send them here to vote for a motion of this kind. One of the taxes, levies, duties and impositions which the Deputies want abolished is that which enables the farmers of this country to grow beet. I am very glad to see Deputy Morrissey looking at the motion. Apparently he never saw it before, although he signed his name to it. That would be one of the results of this motion if it were passed. I wonder would Deputy Morrissey call to Thurles on his way home and tell the workers in Thurles beet factory that he had put his name to a motion which would have the effect of closing down that factory?

Mr. Morrissey

Will you not tell them that?

Mr. Corry

I would not vote for the motion, but the Deputy has his name to it.

Mr. Morrissey

Will you not tell them that I would close the factory?

Mr. Corry

The Deputy has signed his name to it.

Mr. Morrissey

Do not be trying to frighten me.

Mr. Corry

No, because the Deputy is one of those who thinks he is safe in signing his name to any motion in this House when he knows with absolute certainty that it is going to be beaten. That is the only reason this motion is brought forward here. If those Deputies thought for a moment that by any quibble this motion would be passed, you would not see their names on the Order Paper to it. That is the only reason it is on the Order Paper. These people know that it will be beaten.

General MacEoin

Take a chance and let it go through.

Mr. Corry

No; I do not want to destroy the country.

General MacEoin

We will take the blame.

Mr. Corry

Is Deputy Morrissey going to go down to Thurles and tell the workers in the factory there that he has this motion on the Order Paper, that he is going to vote for it and that if that motion be carried, the beet factory must close down at once?

Mr. Morrissey

I would not deprive you of that pleasure.

Mr. Corry

It would be no pleasure to me to have to go down and tell the people in Thurles that they elected a Deputy to this House who is going to be guilty of an action of that kind. I would hate to have to do it.

Mr. Morrissey

It would be quite painful.

Mr. Corry

Still, I should like to hear the Deputy if he is going to conclude on this motion. I do not know whether he has spoken already. I have looked over the names of those who have already spoken on the motion, and I could not see any statement by Deputy Morrissey. I certainly should not like to be responsible for fathering a motion like that. It is the most nonsensical proposal I ever saw.

Mr. Morrissey

Tell us about the republic.

Mr. Corry

The Deputy is not going to get away with it by talking about the republic. The Deputy would cut a very curious figure if he succeeded in carrying this motion. I should like to see his face if he walked into the factory in Thurles——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy has told us about the Thurles factory about half-a-dozen times.

Mr. Corry

These are very serious matters.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

They are very serious, but repetition of that kind cannot be allowed. The Deputy will have to proceed on some other line.

Mr. Morrissey

If it were merely repetition, the Deputy would have been finished 20 minutes ago.

Mr. Corry

I have to point out these very serious results of the motion. In the first place, the flour mills and, in the second place, the beet factories are going to be closed. I put it to the Deputy that he should seriously consider whether he is going to carry on with the motion or whether he will have the courage to stand up and say that he will withdraw it, as any Deputy who has any sense of responsibility would. The Deputy apparently has no sense of responsibility. A number of factories have been started as a result of these duties.

General MacEoin

Point No. 3.

Mr. Corry

Take Dunlops of Cork for instance. Is the Deputy going into Dunlops of Cork to-morrow and tell them that he has a motion down which will mean that all the workers are going to be put on the unemployed list? There are several factories in the Deputy's own constituency, for instance, that would have to be closed down if this motion were carried. They would have to be closed down immediately. I know very well that the County Tipperary was pretty well treated in regard to factories. There are quite a number of them there. Every single one of these factories would have to be closed down.

Mr. Morrissey

Notwithstanding the treatment they got, they deprived you of one of your members at the last election there.

Mr. Corry

A Deputy like Deputy Morrissey may succeed in fooling the people for some little time, but if there is anybody from Tipperary listening to the Deputy to-night, I pity him when he gets back there. The Deputy is quite satisfied now that all the industries started in Tipperary under the industrial policy of this Government should go by the board. The Deputy is quite satisfied that that is going to be one of the definite results of his motion. If he can prove otherwise, I shall be glad to listen to him.

Mr. Morrissey

We are satisfied that you have more unemployed than before you started these factories.

Mr. Corry

That sort of "lip" is played out.

Mr. Morrissey

That is one you will not answer.

Mr. Corry

I will answer it.

General MacEoin

Of course he will.

Mr. Corry

There are not more unemployed.

Mr. Morrissey

Oh, yes.

Mr. Corry

There are more unemployed registered because they have something to get by registering, something more than they had to get in the happy days of Cumann na nGaedheal, when a single man in the National Army would get preference over a married man with five children.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy will have to address himself to the terms of the motion.

Mr. Corry

I am only answering these unseemly interruptions.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy cannot follow all these hares or he will find himself put out. This motion relates to taxes, levies, duties and like impositions on foodstuffs and other necessaries of life. The case of ex-National Army men does not arise on this motion.

Mr. Corry

I am pointing out the result of the passing of this motion, as, admittedly, no Deputy over there has realised what it means, and no Deputy over there cares what it means. Unfortunately I was drawn away from the strict terms of the motion by the unseemly interruptions we heard when I was pointing out to Deputy Morrissey the result in his own county of the carrying out of this motion.

General MacEoin

Are we sure that he is right?

Mr. Corry

Apparently the Deputies were not right when they put down this motion. The same thing applies right along. They are going to tell the farmers of this country—which shows the Deputies' sense of responsibility again—that they are going to do now what they definitely promised the farmers of this country at the last general election that they would not do if they were elected. They definitely promised that they would not interfere with the wheat schemes.

Mr. McGovern

The people are well accustomed to broken promises now.

Mr. Corry

I know they are. Columcille always promised. The promises of Columcille are famous. That is the trouble. At the last general election the Fine Gael Party guaranteed to the farmers that they would not interfere with the wheat schemes if they were elected, and now even though they came in here in a very small majority they are endeavouring to interfere with the wheat scheme, because under this motion, if it is carried, they are abolishing the growing of wheat in this country. In the first place, they will not have the mills to work the wheat. The mills will be closed down. That is the position of affairs under this motion. In the second place, one of those taxes, levies, duties or impositions, whichever you like to call it, had to be imposed to enable the farmers to grow wheat in this country. Still, Fine Gaels claim that they have some interest in Irish industry. If anybody will look at one of the local industrial development associations they will see some one of their names blazoned in the forefront—the name of some individual who is going to walk around there into the Lobby in favour of closing the door of every Irish industry in this country. That is what this motion means. Is there any Deputy there who can show me how those industries are going to carry on and thrive if you apply the free trade principle which I have heard preached from those benches during the past six months? I have already shown one instance—and I can give several others—of the position of affairs that would come about if, through any foolishness of the Dáil, this motion were carried.

I would ask Deputies seriously to go through the list of the tariffs and duties and impositions, as they are called here, which have been imposed by the Government, and to trace each one of them to the particular industry to which it applies. They will then say to themselves: "If that is the position of affairs, am I prepared to withdraw that particular imposition and to close down that particular factory?" Ask yourselves that; ask yourselves that seriously. Let those over there who claim that they represent some few deluded farmers in this country seriously ask themselves: "Am I prepared to go back to the farmers in my constituency and tell them, `Last week in the Dáil I voted for the closing down of the beet factory, so you need not grow any more beet'."

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy has repeated himself, in the same terms and in varying terms, at least half a dozen times, and I shall have to ask him to discontinue his speech if he continues in that strain much longer.

Mr. Morrissey

He was put up to kill time.

Mr. Corry

I regret, a Leas-Chinn Comhairle, that owing to the manner in which this matter has got to be dealt with, and the seriousness of it—which evidently Deputies over there do not realise, or do not want to realise—I have repeated some statements, but, if the repeating of them will drive them into the Deputies' minds, it will do some good. Some Deputies have no minds to take it. Deputy Brennan, speaking here this evening, complained of the £8,000 in tariffs on agricultural machinery. That was one of his complaints. When Deputy Brennan said that, he absolutely failed to realise what was behind the £8,000 tariff. Does Deputy Brennan realise for one moment the number of industries that have been started in this country during the last few years, and the number of dying industries that have been revived during the last few years owing to this tariff on agricultural machinery? Does he realise the expansion that has been given to Pierce's Engineering Works, Wexford?

Does he realise all the shovel mills and spade factories that have cropped up and are giving an enormous amount of employment? Deputy Brennan was also very eloquent on the bacon industry. There is nobody in this House who can tell us more about the bacon industry than Deputy Gorey. I should like him to stand up here and give us a frank admission as to what the profits of his particular bacon factory were in last year and previous years. Let him make a comparison between the position of that particular bacon factory in 1931 and to-day. Let us have all the cats out of the bag.

Mr. Gorey

Is the Deputy very keen on hearing it?

Mr. Corry

I should like to hear it.

Mr. McGowan

Give him a chance now.

Mr. Corry

I will give him a chance later on. I have not gone through quarter of the ills and woes of the results to the country of this unfortunate motion which was brought in here in a moment of aberration or mental delusion. I do not believe Deputy Morrissey ever signed that motion in a sane moment. I have too good an opinion of the Deputy to believe that. Let us get back again to the agricultural machinery and examine that end of it. I should like to refer to the case of a young man in my constituency who was working for Messrs. Scott's in Cork—a good firm. He had £4 10s. a week. Out of his savings he had built a lovely bungalow in Blarney. He was quite happy and content, and settled down; but he saw his opportunity and he had the courage of his convictions in regard to Irish industry. He sold his bungalow, went to live in an old one-roomed house, bought an old mill in Templemichael, and started working it. At the present moment that man is giving employment to 46 people in Templemichael owing to the operation of this tariff that Deputy Brennan has put his finger on and that he says will bring such disastrous results. Deputy Brennan wants to wipe out this industry and throw these 46 people on the dole, along with hundreds of others employed in spade and shovel factories all over the country.

I want Deputies to realise the implications of this motion. I regret that I am becoming hoarse trying to make Deputies realise its implications. There is this proposal in regard to agricultural machinery. I ask Deputies to study the employment given by Messrs. Pierce in Wexford in connection with this industry. Study the employment given there in 1931 and the number employed to-day, and ask yourself if you are going to drive these people out of employment. When you have worked out these things for yourselves I am sure that Deputy Morrissey, at least, will have the decency to come here and say: "I put down that motion in a moment of foolishness; I am sorry for doing so and I express my regret to the House and particularly to Deputy Corry"—because the Deputy has caused me a lot of trouble to-night trying to explain the harm he would cause in his own constituency, and throughout the Twenty-Six Counties, through this motion.

Mr. Morrissey

Does the Deputy realise what I and other Deputies have suffered during the last fifty minutes?

Mr. Corry

I hope the Deputy will suffer a little more.

Mr. Morrissey

If the Chair continues to allow it, I shall have to.

Mr. Corry

The Deputy should not endeavour to dictate to the Chair. The Deputy who has had the hardihood or the mental foolishness to sign such a motion as this is not in a position to give orders to anybody. I am not going to carry on much further except to tell Deputy Morrissey that apparently he wants to see Russian oats coming into this country and our farmers wiped out. That might suit Deputy Morrissey for business reasons, or for other reasons. I suggest that the Irish farmer can grow oats good enough for Irish horses to feed on and can grow barley good enough for Irish animals to eat. The Irish farmers can produce barley suitable for the preparation of any kind of drink that would be regarded as one of the necessities of life that Deputy Morrissey mentioned. I will ask the Deputy to spend the rest of the night seriously thinking over his motion and its implications, and when he does I am sure he will be anxious to apologise. I regret it has taken me so long to drive some spark of seriousness into the heads of some Deputies.

Mr. Bennett

One would have expected that this motion would have been taken seriously. I heard only two Deputies on the Government Benches speaking on the motion. I admit Deputy Kelly did make some attempt to treat the matter in the way in which it should be treated. He, at least, was serious in what he said, even if he did not add any great weight to the debate. He tried to controvert some statements made about the cost of living. He said there was more money in circulation in the country, and, even though prices were increased, these increased prices were justified by the increase of wealth. I am sorry the Deputy did not try to explain what he meant by that statement. It appears to me that the sole object of the two Fianna Fáil Deputies who spoke was to get some modicum of praise from their local supporters. Deputy Kelly's speech seemed to be devoted altogether to boots and a factory in his constituency, and the sum total of the raiméis that we had from Deputy Corry was concerning some flour factory somewhere in his constituency. He treated this House to a tirade totally irrelevant, and there were at least fifty repetitions, because he always came back to the mill at Glendulane, or wherever it was.

Neither of the Deputies got down to the essential portions of the motion, whether or not there is a reduced standard of living and whether or not there is an increase in the cost of living and, I might add, an increase in the cost of dying in this State. To my mind both the cost of living and the cost of dying have gone up. Deputy Kelly told us that a general statement does not prove anything. It does not, but if a statement is made general enough and gets sufficient repetition, it eventually proves something. I submit that if anyone here wants to be satisfied about the reduced standard of living of the people and the increased cost of the essentials, the necessities of life, he has only to go to the people who are in a position to give him definite information, and these people are the women in the households, the women of the poorer, the middle-class and the upper-class in this country.

Some people will argue that there are not evidences of a lower standard of living in cities and towns. Going through Dublin, passing a cinema and seeing the crowds waiting to go in and observing other evidences of apparent prosperity, one might be caught by an argument like that and might be inclined to think that there are no evidences of a decreased standard of living in Dublin. Because there is no apparent evidence of a lower standard of living in the streets of Dublin, it must not be taken that in Dublin there is not poverty and a reduced standard of living. Everybody knows that there is. But the real knowledge of what poverty means and ample evidence that the standard of living has been reduced in this country, are not going to be found in Dublin, in Limerick or Cork, because, although there are poor and needy and although people are suffering by reason of the reduced standard of living and the increased cost of the necessaries of life, they have some little consolation, some quid pro quo. There are various aids for those people. There is the unemployment assistance, there is the home assistance, there are relief works of various kinds—Government relief works and corporation and county council works—in which these men secure employment. I do not say that these aids are a sufficient substitute for the mode of living these people need. But these things are some quid pro quo. But in this State there are people who have none of these benefits. These people, because of the increased cost of living, are suffering intense agony. There are thousands of people in this country who a few years ago were in a fairly average middle-class state of prosperity but these are now reduced to a lower standard of living than any humble person in the City of Dublin. These are people who never begged and will never look for relief or assistance from anybody, even if starving. It is people like these who feel the real edge of the position to which this motion is drawing the attention of the House.

If one wants to learn the real situation, let one go, not only to the small farmers' houses, but to the middle class farmers, and there ask the woman of the house whether she is not enduring a reduced standard of living. There one will find evidence all around of great distress. Ask her if she and her husband and children are not suffering a reduced standard of living because of the increased cost of the necessaries of life. One will be given the real answer, the almost universal answer there, as to what the agriculturists in this State are suffering at present. We have Deputy Corry getting up here this evening like an artist in a circus and treating this matter as if it were a good joke. There is no Deputy on the Fianna Fáil Benches who does not know what the situation is, and no Minister should be unaware of it. However, I would particularly appeal to Deputies representing cities and towns, who perhaps do not know the real situation, to consider seriously the plight of these people. There are farmers and their families, thousands of them, who do not have meat of any kind for weeks and weeks on end. There are farmers whose children, when they come home from school, are regaled on potatoes and milk. Perhaps somebody will answer, "It is good enough for them." It is good enough for them if they are not prepared to stand and make some protest.

The wives and mothers of the farmers in this country are in some cases driven to desperation and many of them to early graves because of the matters this motion deals with. I know of widowers who, because of the economic state to which they have been reduced, have themselves to look after their little children ranging from nine years down to one year old. I know of a case where the father has to wash the children and their clothes, and feed them. I have actually seen the father of a family at nine o'clock at night, after his day's work in the fields, washing the children's clothes and doing the work that should be done for them by a woman. This farmer had not the wherewithal to pay a woman for doing the work. When these and thousands of other children of the farmers come home from school their meais consist of potatoes and milk. These are not small farmers. They are fairly sized farmers, men on whom no slur as to neglect of their work could ever have been cast. There are hundreds and thousands of families of agriculturists in this State who are suffering extreme privation because of the condition to which the country has been reduced.

I am sorry to say that no Deputy of the Fianna Fáil Party who has spoken here has had the decency to admit that the standard of living has been reduced amongst the majority of the people of this State—the farmers and the agricultural workers. No attempt has been made to refute the charge that the cost of living has gone up. It needs little argument from any Deputy to prove that it has gone up. The things that most concern the farmers and agricultural labourers are our exports. Unfortunately, the policy of the Government has been that we have a garden of our own out of which we should feed our own people; that we should keep all our own food for ourselves, that we should build up a tariff wall.

Well, that tariff wall is now there for everybody to see. At one time when the thought struck him at Christmas some Minister went round that garden wall, got up and said: "You may bet I never forget the lips and kisses over the garden wall." Well, the last time he kissed there was the sign of coal on his face. On the next time when there is a meeting over the tariff wall I hope the Minister will bring back something besides the coal agreement. I hope something will be done that will bring some reduction in the matter of the cost of living which everybody knows has gone up. However, this is one of the things that Fianna Fáil is attempting to deny. I hope the Government will do something to make it possible for the people who are suffering so much because of the cost of living to again enjoy some of the comforts they enjoyed in other days. These are the things that affect the people and the Government should be more concerned with the prosperity of all the people than with the success of one flour miller in Cork or one bootmaker somewhere else. After all, the success of one flour miller or bootmaker or the success of one individual factory-owner does not affect the prosperity of the country so much. What really matters is the well-being of the general body of the people, the farmers and the agricultural workers. They are the much more important part of the community.

We hear a good deal of talk about our exports but everybody knows that all our exports have gone down, save one—our exports of human beings. That is the only export that has gone up so far as we can learn from the official statistics. We export the best of our cattle and keep the worst for Roscrea or have them turned into sausages. We are exporting the best and bravest of our young people, the young men and young women who have the courage to venture abroad to Britain to seek the living they cannot get here. These boys and girls are going across to England to make a living. These are the people we are exporting, while the older people, like myself, and the younger children who are not fit to emigrate are kept at home. These are some of the results of the policy pursued by the Government. It is surely time that the people of this country began to think seriously about our economic policy and compel the Government to act on the lines proposed in this motion and thus to make some revision, some modification in the matter of the impossible burdens placed on the people by the increased cost of living. The standard of living of the bulk of the people, which in this country has sunk so low, can in this way be improved.

Mr. O'Reilly

I do not exactly follow the latter portion of the statement made by the Deputy who has just spoken. I do not think that there is any reference in this motion to the specific tariffs which might be taken off. So far as I understand, it is aimed entirely at removal of duties, levies and impositions with a view to raising the standard of living. Deputy Brennan told us that it would be a good and healthy thing to take stock. It is always a good thing to take stock. We have taken stock and we take stock periodically. The Government to whose Party the Deputy belonged were in office for ten years. They tried out the free-trade system until the very last. They would have remained on it still if the people were agreeable, but by the ordinary process, the people indicated that they were no longer agreeable to following a policy which left quite a number of people in County Meath and other counties living under the shelter of iron sheds, living in such sheds along what is possibly the finest, if not the most beautiful, road in Europe. These points were mentioned by me on many occasions. Thank God, the people are no longer there and the tariffs, duties and levies referred to in this motion had something to do with that. Some of that money was spent on the doing of these things. During a period of ten years in which, as Deputy Bennett said, there were high exports, these people remained in misery and starvation. Many of them never touched even a drop of milk except foreign milk, possibly in a dirty tin. I do not want to be extreme in any way, but I want to do justice where justice should ordinarily be done. I claim that we, as a Government, whatever we did, relieved the people who were in bondage and hardship for generations.

Mr. Linehan

Relieved them of their money.

Mr. O'Reilly

They had not any. Whatever they have to-day, they had none then. There was nobody to care about them. As regards the class to whom Deputy Bennett referred, I have the greatest sympathy with them, but I am not going to say it was the economic war left these people in the position in which they are to-day.

Mr. Morrissey

Not at all.

Mr. O'Reilly

Let us be honest about it. This Party left no stone unturned to relieve that class. Their standard of living has gone down, but that is not the fault of these levies and tariffs. It is the fault of other conditions over which no Party in this House had any control. These conditions will only be removed with the co-operation of every Party. This is a grave and serious problem. The statement made here is that we lowered the standard of living. What was the standard of living in the City of Dublin, as I knew it, six, seven, or eight years ago? Were there any of those new houses then in Cabra, or Blackrock directions? What was the condition of the slums? Was any effort made to improve conditions in the slums except for one purpose—that is, to win an election? Promises were made by Deputies opposite, on the authority of the Government, that some thousands would be spent on these matters.

Mr. Brennan

These promises are being made yet.

Mr. O'Reilly

These thousands were not spent, and the slums are there still.

Mr. Brennan

The promises are also there.

Mr. O'Reilly

For four or five years we have been relieving the most extreme cases. That problem was not referred to, although an attempt was made to force us to believe that we were revelling in wealth because of these huge exports, and that the cutting off of the exports has lowered the standard of living of the whole community. Will any Deputy on the opposite benches assert that Dublin is worse to-day, from the point of view of the standard of living, than it was five years ago? Will any Deputy hold that County Meath, in its appearance or standard of living, is worse than it was five years ago?

Captain Giles

I hold it is, and I come from Meath.

Mr. O'Reilly

I am well aware you do. Though you come from Meath, you could not persuade yourself that the standard of living in Meath is lower to-day than it was 12 months ago.

Captain Giles

Why is the Rathcarn colony flying out of it?

Mr. O'Reilly

What about all the cottages which have been erected there?

Captain Giles

Borrowed money.

Mr. O'Reilly

Are they not occupied? Where did the people who live there come from? You tell us that the population has gone down. Where did we get the people to put into these cottages? I am not referring to the colony. Where did we find the people to occupy the houses in Navan and Trim? Was it not in the houses which were constantly flooded, in the rotten houses in the back streets of Trim?

Captain Giles

Yes.

Mr. O'Reilly

They were taken out of that and put into neat houses. Is that not raising the standard of living? Is there a house empty in Trim?

Captain Giles

The poorhouse.

Mr. O'Reilly

The only house empty in Trim is the poorhouse.

Captain Giles

You made a mistake there.

Mr. O'Reilly

The conditions are not the best. I do not claim they are, but one thing is certain—that, if suitable and proper housing has any relation to the standard of living, then, in the City of Dublin and in the many counties through which I go, the standard of living has been raised to a very large extent.

Captain Giles

And no employment.

Mr. O'Reilly

There is unemployment but not unemployment as we knew it. You were not a county councillor then. In those days, every county council meeting was bombarded by men looking for employment. There is not one to-day.

Mr. Brennan

They have gone to England.

Captain Giles

They go to the Fianna Fáil clubs.

Mr. O'Reilly

There are quite a lot of Fianna Fáil clubs, but they did not get their employment there.

Mr. Brennan

They got plenty of promises, anyway.

Mr. O'Reilly

They found work somehow, notwithstanding that Deputy Dillon has told us that domestic servants leave this country because they cannot get sufficiently fine material to wear. According to Deputy Dillon, these prohibitions and tariffs prevent these girls from getting the beautiful, shimmering materials that are made in foreign countries, and they will not eventually be allowed to go to dances here because they wear tweed skirts and brogue shoes. That may be the reason, but I do not think it is. There is material enough here to be got if they want to go to dances, but it indicates that he does not feel that their standard of living has been lowered. It is very doubtful whether, with the exception of the class I have spoken of, the standard of living has been lowered in any class. Figures and statistics have been quoted here. I have no great wish to quote statistics or figures—they are dry things; but undoubtedly there are quite a lot more motor cars on the road. Undoubtedly, the Minister for Finance gets more money through taxation on drink and more money from entertainments. There is hardly a doubt that there is more money invested in industry and otherwise.

The standard of living of a large body of the farmers is not what it ought to be, and I am not going to deny that for one moment; but neither am I going to deny that the standard of living of farmers in any country is what it ought to be. We read of the position of the British farmers, the Welsh farmers and the farmers in Scotland. We see all the dilapidation which the new bounty has inflicted on some of them, because bounties they do get. We read of one set of farmers who may be supporters of the present Government in Great Britain stating that they got £40,000,000 in subsidies, while on the other side of the House we hear it stated that they got only £8,000,000, but when that kind of talk goes on in that country, everything cannot be well there, either. They have had to resort to taxes, subsidies and other methods, much the same as we have.

There would not have been a word about this but for the one fact that there are many members on the opposite benches who regret very much and very sincerely that they did not adopt this policy when they had the opportunity. There is a certain amount of jealousy in existence, but I submit that this thing ought to be examined in cold blood. There should be no jealousies. It should be examined in a cold, business-like way and stock should be taken in a proper way without heat or political propaganda, so that the country, and we, may know the facts of the situation. So far as the evidences appear at present, so far as any road one travels or any country town one goes into— even the City of Dublin—is concerned, the indications point to an uprising of the nation and show quite clearly that the policy which was preached here for hundreds of years and which is now being put into practice is unquestionably a successful policy, and, notwithstanding the fact that there are some whose standards of living have fallen, the great majority, and especially those who needed a raised standard, have undoubtedly got a higher standard of living.

Mr. Gorey

As one who was a former member of this House and who has come back here again, I want to say that one always listens with respect to what Deputy O'Reilly has to say. His addresses to this House have the merit at least of trying to do justice according to his lights in a serious manner to any of the problems to which he addresses himself. His speech is a great improvement on some of the speeches we heard from the Government Benches. We listened to one of those speeches to-night. It reminded me more of the speech of an organ-grinder's assistant, if an organ-grinder's assistant could speak, than the address of a responsible individual, a representative of the people.

I have been asked half a dozen times by different people to give my views about the cost of living, the standard of living, and as to how the bacon industry is affected, as it is known that perhaps I could give figures first-hand. It is true that the standard of living for some people engaged in business, the bacon industry and some of the other industries, has risen, not by 5 or 10 per cent., but by something like 500 per cent.; but if we go to the producer of the raw materials for bacon, what do we find? Deputies claim here to have done a lot with regard to bacon with their tariffs and all the rest. The Government in office now has done nothing for the bacon industry that was not done by the previous Government. In 1931, before they went out of office, the last Government had an expert examination of the bacon position made, and before the report of that commission reached this House a provisional prohibition on bacon coming into this country was sanctioned by this House, on the proposition of the late Minister for Agriculture. This Government had nothing to do but to adopt the report of the committee and confirm an act performed by the previous Government.

If I were a business man, pure and simple, I should be spending hours every night praising and blessing this Government for what they have done for the few business people in this country; but, as a producer, I would be cursing them all the time. What is the position with regard to the bacon industry? Has the pig population increased since this Government came into power and put on impositions, and since the institution of the Bacon Board and the Pigs Marketing Board?

The facts are that before these boards came into existence we were killing anything from 1,500 to 1,700 pigs a week. What are we killing for the last 12 or 18 months? From 700 to 800. We are killing half the pigs we used to kill before, and the same applies, I think, to nearly all the factories. The quotas have gone down. Why have they gone down? Because of the ridiculous, idiotic imposition of this Government with regard to feeding stuffs. They instituted an admixture scheme consisting of an admixture of certain Irish meals in pig feed. On the one hand, it was too dear, and on the other, it did not give sufficient results to justify its existence. The pig population has fallen by half because of that admixture scheme. It has fallen because of two things—the price of the feeding stuff and the fact that the animals fed on it did not give a return for the food they got at the price that had to be paid for it.

The pig population has fallen by half and our killings have fallen by half, but what about our balance sheet? There is no secret about it. Our balance sheet has been produced every year in public for the ten years of our existence. For the last seven or eight years we have been steadily making money. We were making £1,500, £2,000 and £2,500 a year profit on the 1,500 or 1,600 pigs a week. What is our position on the 700 or 850 pigs a week? Instead of making £2,000 profit, we are making £16,000 or £17,000, and if all the pig-curing concerns in Ireland were able to live when we were able to live, what are they making now with four times the quota we have got? As I have said, if I were a business man, pure and simple, I would be blessing this Government every night.

Mr. Heron

Business men are not pure or simple.

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy may be simple.

Mr. Gorey

I agree with the Deputy. They are neither pure nor simple.

Debate adjourned.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 17th November.