I do not intend to follow the Taoiseach into many of the side-shows in which, from time to time, he indulges; into the many fields in which he gambols—and I am never quite certain whether he tramples the grass or refreshes it; I am afraid he tramples more than he refreshes—nor into the various Departments which he has found it necessary, from time to time, to take over—we can, at least, say that the influence there was disturbing if not productive. I will deal mainly with the Taoiseach in his capacity as head of the Government, as the man who, in the last analysis, is responsible, not merely for Government policy, but for the working of the Executive Council. I shall confine my remarks to what seems to me to be a fair examination of what he does in that particular capacity, especially in so far as the internal affairs of this country are concerned—I am dealing, therefore, not with the general external policy of this country, which has been enunciated on several occasions, and beyond the mere enunciation of which it is not necessary to go. Possibly, occasionally, in that respect a little less expression of views might have been helpful, but we can pass that by. Dealing with a much more difficult task, a task that requires not merely proclaiming policy, sitting tight, and maintaining a certain stand taken up, but a task that requires continuous activity on the part of the Government; it is there that I find the Government wanting — wanting in policy, wanting in activity and wanting in work.
It has been impressed upon us and upon the country on divers occasions, sometimes with divers voices perhaps by the Taoiseach and his Ministers, how grave the crisis is with which the country is confronted. That crisis takes two forms with one of which, as I have said, I find it unnecessary to deal: our relations with countries outside Éire. The other deals with the crisis that confronts the country as a result of the future that we have to face, even if we are spared, as we pray we may be spared, invasion of this country, to which the Taoiseach has referred on various occasions in language as lurid as he can command. That internal crisis is sufficiently grave to merit not merely the attention of the Taoiseach and the Ministers, but to call for very decided action. If we look at the policy of the Government in that respect, as shown in action, what do we find?—lack of foresight, doing to-morrow what should have been done yesterday, waiting until crises are on us before anything is done. Now, I think that is a fair summing up, as the country sees it, of the work of the different Departments of Government.
The mere announcement of policy, the mere warning of the people of the seriousness of the crisis that is facing them, and repeated expressions of determination to get the most out of the situation is not enough. We want Ministers not merely to talk in public pronouncements, in meetings at weekends, in allocutions over the radio, about the seriousness of the situation, but we want some evidence that they are guiding the Departments of which they have control to meet these crises, and of that the country is given no evidence whatever. There is a palpable failure not merely of this Minister or of that Minister, of this Department or of that Department, but of the Government as a whole, and it is impossible to acquit the head of the Government of responsibility for that failure: the failure of the Ministers to do their work. Every Deputy in the House can determine how far they are doing their work. That is the failure, in the last resort, of the head of the Government as well. Inactivity, letting things slide, repeated examples of failure to face what the Ministers themselves proclaim, and what the Taoiseach himself proclaims, to be one of the gravest crisis that could face any country are what we complain of in the conduct of the Government at the present moment.
I am not denying the usefulness of some of the speeches that were made, I am not denying the necessity even of trying to stir up the people of this country to the serious crisis that they are facing at the moment, and the more serious crisis that they probably will have to face in the not very distant future, even if we are spared any onslaught of a military kind on this country. Now, that work of stirring up opinion has its place and is useful. but more than that is required from the Government. The Government is not merely a propaganda machine to stir up the people to do something. The head of the Government is not merely the head of a propaganda machine—I readily admit that he is a great pro pagandist agent himself—he has a great deal more responsibility than that, and the Government should lead the country not merely by talk but by action. They should not spend all their energies in telling the country to face the crisis that is going to come when they themselves, month after month, in the main Departments that affect the lives of the people of the country, give striking evidence of their failure to face the crisis that is actually upon us. In view of that, how can they expect the people to take their warnings seriously—looking at that side of the matter for the moment— when, to judge by their own actions as seen in the workings of the different Departments of which they are nominally at all events in control, they themselves are not taking the situation seriously?
Deputies of the different Parties have been in the House during the various debates that have taken place on Government Departments which have mainly the future of this country in their hands, so far as a Government can be said to have that. During those debates can any Deputy say that there was an element of seriousness in the attitude adopted, even in this House, by the Ministers? I wonder if the members of the Government Party are satisfied with the way in which Ministers are doing their work. Are the members of the Government Party convinced, faced with the serious future which has been painted so blackly by the Taoiseach and some of his Ministers, that the same Ministers are really throwing their energy into facing the various problems that confront the country? If the members of the Government Party are satisfied with what they see in the way of performance by the Government and the Ministers, then I can only say that the members of that Party are very easily satisfied.
I wish, therefore, that the Taoiseach, whatever we may think of his various activities in other directions, could spare a little of his time for what he may regard as the rather thankless task of getting his Government to work. It is more congenial, I admit to tackle other problems—they are more attractive in many respects—but, after all, his main responsibility is to see that the members of his Government do their duty to the nation. So far as such vital problems as supplies, control of prices, and unemployment are concerned, one can certainly say that Ministers are not guiding their Departments, and, if we are to judge by the general result, the only conclusion that we can come to is that the Taoiseach himself is not guiding or leading the Ministers.
We are faced, therefore, in a number of cases with what virtually amounts to the collapse of the Executive Council. I would be the last to deny that there are some Ministers who do work hard, who do try to meet the task, the heavy task very often, that is upon their shoulders—and mind you I can see that even where I might be entirely in disagreement with a line of policy pursued by a Minister—but in some of the most important Departments we have no evidence of anything of the kind. Time after time in this House various speakers have tried, and tried in vain, to stimulate the Ministers into doing something. I must say that up to the present either the return from our efforts has been very slight, or else such a lot of time has been lost because Ministers could not make up their minds to take the necessary action that a new crisis has supervened upon the old, and also requires to be dealt with. That has been the history of this Government for a long time past now, practically since the emergency arose—that is complete inability, unwillingness if you like, to try reasonably to forecast what kind of measures would be necessary to meet the future which they profess to know this country will have to face. There is hardly an instance in which one or other responsible Minister has not waited until the crisis has gone almost beyond cure. Then when the crisis is so obvious that its existence can no longer be denied, we have simply hasty hand-to-mouth measures which may palliate the existing disease for the moment but only to pile up more trouble for the future. Is there anybody down the country— Deputies know the feeling in the country as well as I do—who really believes that the Ministers have shown any foresight in dealing with the various matters? I do not think there is, and that is one of the principal complaints I have heard—that complete lack of any understanding of what this country will be likely to have to face even a couple of months ahead.
How can a Department do its work if it does not get guidance from the Minister who is at the head of the Department? I fear that what is happening is this: at a time when the energies of everybody are more and more required, more and more work is being thrown on the Departments on their own responsibility. A Department is getting no effective help, it seems to me, from its Ministerial head. There is simply thrown on their shoulders enough to discourage any body of men who are dealing with entirely new and difficult problems, almost with their hands tied, certainly with their hands not helped, and they are expected to solve all those problems. More and more it seems to me the Government is leaving things in the hands of the permanent officials, and thereby the problems that call for solution have not in any way been advanced towards solution. How can a Department carry out the policy of the Minister when the Minister does not know what policy it has to carry out? How can a Department interpret the mind of the Minister when the Minister apparently, on departmental matters anyhow, has no mind to interpret? Is it surprising, in a case of that kind, that the whole Government machinery should show every sign of disease and collapse? I do not think it is. To expect anything else would be to expect a miracle. If there is that failure of control on the part of the Ministers, then we must ask—I do not think the question can be avoided—what control is there over the Ministers?
There is any amount of complacency undoubtedly. I think it was the second in command, the Tánaiste, who told the Seanad on one occasion that practically the Ministers were supermen, men of tremendous character, energy and ability. Well, if that is so, why are they not showing productive results? There is only one explanation, and that is, that they are not getting the necessary lead from the head of the Government. Either the Ministers are incapable—and that may take some responsibility off the head of the Government—or the Ministers are what the head of the Government occasionally states, and what his second in command flamboyantly states, men of ability, anxious to work, willing to work and working hard. Then the failure must fall altogether on the head of the Taoiseach. It is one thing or the other. If the Ministers are incapable of doing their work, if whatever enthusiasm they had when they came into this House as the Government has disappeared, then again the primary responsibility is not on those men but on the head of the Government.
I think there was a time when those Ministers showed a great deal of energy and when they did guide their Departments. I do not at all agree with the manner in which they did guide them. A great deal of harm was done as a result of the policy they pursued, but it is a fact that when they first came into office and for a number of years afterwards the Ministers did show a great deal of energy, and did show a great deal of initiative; that carried them on; it carried each one of them on. Can anybody assert—I wonder can the members of Fianna Fáil assert—that there is that same energy, that same initiative, to-day? To-day, when this State is confronted with a crisis unparalleled in its history, with a crisis that, if we are to judge by their speeches, is fully realised by the Government, is there that initiative? Can anybody seriously contend that the Ministers give an appearance of leading their Departments, of having any really well-thought-out policy, or of having any systematic methods by which that policy could be realised? Do they give the appearance of men who have anything of that kind in their heads? Surely not. Is not that the reason why there is undoubtedly such a great deal of dissatisfaction in the country? Again and again, the Ministers appealed to the people to face their obligations, to do their part to save the country. Well, the people on the whole do try to respond to that, and certainly they do so with comparatively little grumbling. I do not mind what class of population you take, whether you take the farmers, the labourers or anybody else, I think the amount of grumbling is comparatively little, considering what they have to face and what they have to suffer. It is unreasonable on the part of the Government to complain of any criticisms which they hear from those people. Never I think were our people more patient than they are at the present time, and that ought to be appreciated. Appeals have been made to everybody in this country to do his best. I think the first set of men to whom the Taoiseach should appeal to do their duty to the country, to do their part in helping the country, is his own Ministry. There is at the present moment no drive, no leadership of the officials, as far as I can see. They are relied on, not merely to provide measures to carry out a policy, but almost to put up the policy themselves. There is, on the part of the Ministers, a neglect of their obvious and simple duty.
Even in the gravest matters, there is no information to be had, and the whole position is most unsatisfactory. They do not give information to the House when the House asks for it. They do not take the country into their confidence in the way in which the country should be taken into their confidence, if the picture they paint approaches anything near the truth. Apparently, very often they have not got the information. They are asked in this House on various occasions what is going to be done as regards fuel or matters of that kind, or whether there will be sufficient transport to carry the fuel from the bog to the fireplace, and the answer is: "We do not know." When they are asked whether there will be a sufficient supply of fuel, or whether any more coal will come into this country, the answer is: "We do not know." What efforts have they made to find out these things, or what efforts have they made even to strike bargains, in that particular respect, as regards the provision of the necessary fuel for transport? Is it not disheartening to people down the country to read a confession by the Minister for Supplies to the effect that he does not know whether the result of their work —the fuel that has been produced—will be brought to the place where it ought to be consumed? Turf will be most necessary in the coming months and in the coming winter, but it is not necessary on the bog: it is necessary to get it into the towns, and every farmhouse in the country where there is not a bog. When we ask, as it was asked here in the course of the debate, whether or not the transport will be there to accomplish that necessary task, the answer we get is: "We do not know." I am not at all satisfied that the Ministers have taken the necessary steps to find out how matters are likely to stand. It appears to me that they have simply asked questions and have been satisfied with the answers that were fired off at them; there is no proof of anything in the nature of pursuing the matter further; I think they simply shrug their shoulders and leave the matter there.
These, then, undoubtedly, are the main faults which we have to find with the Government as a whole, and with the leadership of the Government. So far as home policy is concerned, so far as the food crisis and the fuel crisis that, we are told, threaten this country in such a black fashion, are concerned, dry rot has set in in the Government, and what we are anxious to know is where the dry rot started and who is responsible for its spread. Did it start among the Ministers, or did it go from the head downwards? But that the dry rot is there is perfectly clear. Apparently, it is such a painless disease that the Ministers are not aware of it, but there are very few people down the country who are not, to a greater or a lesser extent, aware of it.
The Government are altogether too much inclined to let things develop along their own lines. Their reaction period is very slow. They never act in time. They take steps without considering the effect of these steps, and when they are called upon to deal with anything, they think that a few glib words, as I said here in the House previously, are not merely an answer to serious criticism, but that these glib words are a solution of the problem. In normal times there may be an excuse for that. In normal times people may be taken in by that sort of talk, but people are not going to be sufficiently heated during the coming winter months by glib answers from Ministers, nor are they going to be fed by glib answers from Ministers—and that is practically all we get. What ever enthusiasm they had—and there was plenty of it—when they took over the Government of this country, is not everybody aware that that enthusiasm has vanished? I do not like to say that they have become lazy, but certainly they have become tired. They certainly fail to face their tasks. They have neither foresight, initiative, drive nor governing capacity, and I do not know what worse faults I can find with the Government than these. There is no co-ordination, as far as I can see, between the Ministers, and there is no good in their appealing to the country to make its best effort if they rely on such appeals alone. Whilst it is necessary to stir up the people, they are really undermining the whole morale of the people politically. They are putting them in a worse condition to face the crisis that they themselves know is coming on us unless a miracle of some kind or another occurs, and it is not the business of a Government to rely on a miracle occurring. They should at least take the necessary steps to meet a situation which they see is coming, and that is the one thing that we have no evidence that they are doing.
As I have put it in this House previously, it is not a failure of democracy: it is a failure of autocracy. Never, since this State was set up, has more power been given to a Government than has been given to this Government to deal with the various crises that face the country. Never has less been done to meet crises than has been done by this Government. Autocratic powers, practically, are put into the hands of the Government. They are politically almost omnipotent in this country. How have they made use of these powers? It is not democracy that is being found wanting at the present moment: it is autocracy, relying altogether on the civil servants. The kind of government that is being condemned now by the failure of the present Ministry is the type of government in which a number of people see salvation. Dissatisfied with Parliamentary government, those people think everything would be all right if Parliament were abolished and if power were given into the hands of a smaller body of men. We have that to-day. Power is given into such hands. Anything that they determine is law and is binding. Is their record a recommendation for a new system? So far, therefore, as government has failed in this country, it is autocratic government that has failed, and not democratic government.
What have they to show for the immense power that was put into their hands 20 months ago? The situation, as it confronts the country at present! And during that 20 months—that period in which they have had unrestricted power—what have they done to make any of the coming crises less severe? I admit that they cannot do everything. A number of factors, undoubtedly, were and are beyond their control. Nobody could think of criticising them for not dealing with things that are beyond their control, but we should like to have some evidence that they are managing properly what is in their control and doing something besides merely appealing to the people. If you want the co-operation of the people, and if you want the people to do their part, then we can only say to the Government that they must do their part, and that is what they are not doing. They fixed prices this year; they should have fixed them last year. That is quite typical of the whole conduct and management of affairs by the Government. When they act at all, it is too late. Generally, as I say, they let the crisis not merely prick them into action, but kick them into action. That is the main fault we have to find with them. Remember, on the manner in which this Government is carried on in the course of the continuance of this emergency the whole fate of this country may depend. Surely it is not too late, even at this eleventh hour, to ask the head of the Government to see that his Government face the tasks that he knows confront the country and that he asks the country to face. The first people that ought to show some evidence that they are facing their work and the immense tasks before them are the Ministers. The duty of the Taoiseach, even at this hour, is to see that his Ministers face these tasks.
