Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 16 Apr 1943

Vol. 89 No. 17

Committee on Finance. - Vote 69—Supplies (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:—
"That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration"—(Deputy Mulcahy).

I should like to contribute a few words on this Estimate. The Minister has been subjected to a drum fire of criticism during this debate. I do not intend to add very much to that criticism. I think that the members of the general public are, perhaps, the most eloquent and formidable critics of the Department of Supplies. There are one or two matters to which I should like to direct the Minister's attention. I think it is generally agreed by the critics of the Minister's Department that, in many respects, his policy is not adequate and has perhaps been diverted in the wrong direction.

I would like to say, with regard to the great majority of the Minister's staff, that in my experience of them they are decent and business-like people. They are carrying on under very difficult circumstances and, I think, are trying to do the best they can. They are, of course, bound by the various rules and regulations imposed on them, but within the limits of those rules and regulations they are, I think, trying to do their best. I should like also to pay tribute, as other members of the House have paid tribute, to the members of the staffs of the ships that are sailing under our flag. I think we ought to be very proud of our merchant seamen who are carrying supplies to us in very difficult circumstances. The matter does not arise on this Estimate, but I think we were rather slow, in the first instance, in providing ourselves with ships.

In my view, one of the most important things the country is short of is fuel for steam raising and commercial purposes generally, fuel which comes under the head of coal and which cannot possibly be adequately supplied either by water-power or turf. On that I have a proposition to make to the Minister. I do not know whether or not he will regard it as fantastic, but I would ask him to consider it. There is no question whatever but that industry generally and the comforts of this community would be very vastly improved if we could increase the quantity of coal that we are able to import. The fundamental difficulty is that we do not own any coal mines. We have to depend entirely on outside countries for coal of the quality I speak of. We have, however, quite close to our shores a very large number of coal areas in England and Wales. I feel quite certain that there must be a number of derelict mines or, shall I say, a number of mines that are not being fully worked owing to the man-power situation in Great Britain, in the areas that I speak of. Would it be beyond the realms of possibility for our Government to arrange a bargain with Great Britain under which we could as a unit—in the same way as any business corporation—lease a mine in England or in South Wales convenient to the seaboard, and by so doing bring coal to this country?

I put that forward as a business proposition, if it could be arranged, that we should lease such coal mine, manage it with our own nationals, and in that way provide for the coal shortage here. I think the proposition is one that is worth inquiring into. I can quite see, of course, that there are considerable difficulties in the way, but I think those difficulties could be overcome. It may, possibly, be suggested that we have not enough skilled miners for such an undertaking. I think we have enough to make a start with, and those available could train others. It would certainly be a way of bringing coal to the country. So far as this country is concerned, I cannot see that there would be any international objection to such a proposition. I feel certain, as I have said, that there must be quite a number of derelict and redundant mines in England and South Wales which are close to the Irish Sea.

The only other matter I should like to refer to is the question of the Orders which are coming out day by day from the Department of Supplies. I do not say those Orders are not necessary; I quite agree that they are. We all accept the rationing system as being necessary, but it is very difficult for the ordinary layman, indeed it is very difficult for a trained lawyer, to follow the mass of legislation which is created by these various Orders that come out from time to time. The remarks I am making do not apply solely to the Department of Supplies; they apply to the various Departments that from time to time issue these Orders. They do, however, apply in particular to the Minister's Department for the reason that a great number of new offences are being created from day to day which in normal times would not be considered as being offences. Under our law as it exists at present it is no defence for anyone to plead that he is not aware of what the legal position is.

Everyone is presumed to know the law. As a lawyer, I find the greatest difficulty sometimes in tracing the effects of these various Orders. I think some attempt should be made to give the public fuller information, either through the medium of the wireless or the Press, as to the effect of the various Orders made. Secondly, I think there should be some form of codification, so that the public would know exactly where they are in these matters.

I have made some suggestions which I hope the Minister will consider. I suppose it is not news to him that his Department is extremely unpopular in the country. If he did not realise that before, as I am sure he did, he must have realised it from the remarks which have fallen mostly from this side of the House since the debate opened. The question of coal is undoubtedly a very serious one, and nothing should be left undone to provide this country with steam-raising commercial fuel of that kind. I think there is a possible avenue of approach in the suggestion I have made.

Like my colleagues, I am afraid I have some criticism to offer. While I feel that the Department is a very necessary one, I think it is not doing its work in the way a Department should. There is too much irritation being caused amongst the public. As Deputy Esmonde said, there are too many Orders which are not explained thoroughly to the people. I am looking at the matter rather from the point of view of the country districts than that of Dublin. There is a sheaf of Orders issued every week affecting prices. As the Minister knows, there are thousands of small shops throughout the country, many of which might be called huckster shops, the owners of which have not got much education. They do not even see the daily papers, although sometimes they may see a weekly paper. It is impossible for them to follow the various changes in prices or other matters. Yet they are treated in the same way as the big business man who knows his business. I can quite understand that the Minister cannot differentiate, that he has to deal with the country as a whole. But, in dealing with the country as a whole, I am afraid that he or his Department has not gone thoroughly into the matter. I know they have a difficult job, but I do not believe they have gone into the matter thoroughly.

Take, for instance, the question of tea. Nearly three years ago the Minister told people to buy in all the supplies they possibly could. I think he started with flour, but in a general statement which he made, he included everything. The result was that those with any money bought in tea—especially shopkeepers. There were a number of small shopkeepers depending upon wholesalers for a supply of tea who eventually did not get any tea at all. Transport was restricted, and an excuse was provided for vans to go off the road. These people eventually did buy tea in some way or other, and perhaps they did charge a little over and above the fixed price. When the Minister brought in the rationing scheme, shopkeepers were told to supply a certain quantity of tea to their customers, and they were allowed a certain percentage of their former supplies. What happened in connection with that is that some cute business people refused to take tea rationing cards from former customers while drawing their percentage of tea. It should be easy to find out through the system of registration whether a man who was drawing his percentage of tea had a sufficient number of customers to cover that quantity. That matter was never looked into. In a good many cases people, especially poor people, were left without their supply of tea, because a number of these shopkeepers did not accept any cards from their former customers, although they got their supply of tea. It is not for me to tell the Minister how they disposed of that tea. Even at the present time I am sure that could be discovered by the Department.

In the case of the small shops and the huckster shops throughout the country to which I have referred, they got their supplies in a rather haphazard manner from vans and kept no account of what they had been getting. They might get five pounds of tea and a few hundred cigarettes, as well as other things, at a time. When the vans went off the road these people were left practically without any supplies. They did everything they possibly could to try to eke out an existence. If they got a few pounds of tea, they might perhaps have charged a little more than the fixed price for it. For a long time these small shopkeepers had supplied the people in their district as well as they could, and the people were glad to be able to get the supplies locally.

Now the Minister is driving these people out of business and compelling them to seek home assistance or some other means of support, while he is driving their former customers into the multiple shops. I believe that the Minister was ill-advised three years ago when, instead of trying to conserve supplies in the big wholesale places or taking charge of them himself, he told people to buy all they could.

At present I understand that in my county there are many prosecutions pending in connection with these Orders. One thing I have to complain of is that these cases have been pending so long. In some cases, at any rate, the people themselves would prefer that the prosecutions would be gone on with at once. Goods are seized, a man is put into prison for a night or two, and then let out. Surely, these cases should be gone on with. For months now these people have been kept in a state of suspense. It is very hard to understand what the reason is, why a man's goods should be seized, the man himself arrested, and three months afterwards the prosecution should still be pending. When an offence is committed the matter should not be left over for months, keeping the person concerned in a state of suspense as to what will happen in the future.

The Minister has controlled prices. He has, after some time, allowed a little more profit on tea and some other things, but he has not left to the ordinary shopkeepers the profit that should be left to them. I expect he has controlled prices on the basis of the turnover of the big business man in Dublin or the big towns. He has not taken into account the ordinary shopkeeper doing a small business. It was always the custom in the country to have a big profit on tea. There is very little profit on sugar.

The Minister did not take that into account. He cut profits to the minimum on which a big business could live but on which the small business could not exist. It is difficult to understand why the Minister did that because I am sure it is not the intention to put 50 per cent. of the people in small towns and in rural Ireland out of business and to drive the people into the multiple shops. In fact, the actions of the Department bear that appearance. That would never have occurred if, as I said, the Minister had insisted, when he started rationing, that every shopkeeper should register his former customers.

Another matter to which I wish to refer is cigarettes. We have through the country a terrible outcry, especially in backward areas that had been supplied by vans, that there is not a cigarette to be had. Small shopkeepers in those areas cannot get cigarettes because no van goes into the area. I must pay tribute to the National Wholesale Association of Tobacco Distributors who are doing their best in the matter. The Minister will have to come to the rescue somehow. Whether they can be supplied by the wholesalers or not I do not know, but the wholesalers have the excuse that they have no way of getting to these areas; their petrol is restricted; there are all kinds of restrictions on them. It is better for these wholesalers, I must admit. Cigarettes are not going to the areas to which they should go and it is a matter that should be seriously looked into by the Department. In the Slievardagh mining area of Tipperary there is not a cigarette except those sold singly, even down in the mines, at 2d. each. I know the wholesale association is doing its best at the moment to get some cigarettes for the area. I would like the Department to take note of it.

With regard to the licences which have been revoked and those which are about to be revoked, I would like to stress what every Deputy said yesterday that the way in which it is being done is most unjust and unfair. It would be much better if the Department wiped out every licence in every case of prosecution from the very beginning. It would be no more arbitrary than what the Minister is doing.

The Minister and his Department do not seem to take into account that different district justices take different views. One district justice may impose a heavier fine than another. I do not know on what basis the Minister and his Department go when revoking those licences but certainly, if one man is fined £2 and another is fined 10/-, by different district justices, it does not seem fair that the man who is fined £2 should have his licence revoked, while the man who is fined 10/- has not his licence revoked. In that matter, I think the Minister would need to set up some committee within his own Department, if he does not set up some tribunal to review the whole matter. I would like to stress what Deputy Browne said last night, that you should wipe out the whole thing and begin anew. I do not care how far you go in wiping out licences then, but let the people know what will be done and what they are up against.

In many cases there were more mistakes than deliberate offences. If you go into a shop in the country you may have to knock at the counter and it is not the one member of the family who will attend in every case. They are scarcely doing any business most of the days of the week and some member of the family will run out to attend the customer. The customer asks for a pot of a certain kind of jam or marmalade. No one in the house knows the price of the jam or marmalade of the kind you ask for. It is handed to the customer and the customer pays, say 1/6 for it. The shopkeepers may be bad business people but they have pulled along with the ordinary people all their lives, and what I object to is that somebody to whom credit was given may go along to somebody else and say that that a shopkeeper has charged him so much for a pot of jam or for a quarter of a pound of tea. Then somebody writes to the Department and the shopkeeper is immediately pounced on although there is no deliberate evading of the law.

For those reasons I would ask the Minister to go into all these cases seriously, not to revoke the licence and throw them out of business. Throughout the whole country—I am not certain about Dublin—a number of people dealing in every shop get credit from week to week, from month to month. Sometimes while they are idle they get credit. In my county at the moment they get credit for three weeks before they are paid by the county council for working on the bog. If the shopkeepers' licences are taken away because they have made these mistakes, these people will be crowding to the home assistance officer and trouble will be created for everybody, county councillors, T.D's. and everybody else. In fact—it is hard to say it—this revocation of licences has come on so suddenly and in so few cases out of all the prosecutions that have taken place, that I am afraid it looks as if it is done with an eye to the general election. "What about a few shopkeepers? We will get the crowd of workers behind it." I hope it is not the case but it would make you inclined to think that way.

There is trouble in regard to butter. I think it was referred to by a Deputy from Louth last night. I am living just beside a central creamery where there are nine auxiliaries and even during the past week a number of poor people could not get a pound of butter. I want to draw the Minister's attention to the fact that a number of people in the country do not deal regularly for butter in any shop. That is well known to every Deputy from the country. A number of people were accustomed to getting a pound of butter at the creamery and a pound of butter at a few other places. They did not include butter in their ordinary weekly order as in Dublin. These people are left completely without butter. Until the Minister finds some proper system of distribution, the people who are worst off for butter will not be able to get it. Before I, or any other Deputy, obtain a supply of butter these people should be provided for. On Monday, I saw people who were working in a bog begging their neighbours for half a pound of butter. That is the position in a dairying area and the Minister should find some means of rectifying it.

As regards transport, the Minister seems to have been experimenting since his Ministry was established. Each year, petrol has been getting shorter. He has painted many gloomy pictures for us but it is only now that he has commenced to experiment in connection with gas-producing plants and the fuel for such plants. The man who puts into his car or van or lorry a gas-producing plant is immediately deprived of petrol. A man may have five vehicles. If they are gas-driven, he will find that they are laid up every second day. I do not know whether this happens in order to get rid of the gas-producing plant. Some people will tell you that the gas produced by turf is all right for this purpose while others say that it is no good. I am afraid that even the drivers of some of these cars sit down on the road in order to try to get from their firm a car driven by petrol. The Minister should now, although it is almost too late, use every effort to see that as many vehicles with gas-producing plants are as possible on the road and to see that as much fuel as possible is provided for them. I suggest also that he should find some big motor owners who would train men to drive these cars fitted with gas-producing plants and make them drive them. I am afraid that drivers are doing a lot of harm in that way. It may be that, in many cases, they do not understand the apparatus and are not able to work it, but it is a terrible source of trouble. I suggest also that where a man puts in gas-producing plants, the Minister should not reduce his petrol to the minimum, that he should not be too sparse in his allocation of petrol to him. I urge that because the drivers, not being used to the mechanism or not wanting to use such vehicles while other drivers have petrol-driven vehicles, may not do their job very well. The Minister should give a certain amount of petrol to every firm and make that firm supplement it by the use of gas-producers if the fuel can be found. Between anthracite and peat there should be sufficient fuel. Then, there is a good deal of waste shrubbery and wood which are no use for any other purpose. I hope the Minister will now go the whole way in this connection, but I think he should have experimented before petrol became so scarce.

There are complaints in Tipperary, Clonmel and Cashel with regard to the use of hackney plates. I am afraid that these complaints refer to the Minister's Department. Some men who had not hackney plates later then 1939 have now got hackney plates. They were not dependent for a livelihood on these cars. In one case, a hackney plate was given, I understand, against the advice of the Gárda. Others who live in isolated areas who had hackney plates but were not using their cars in 1941 have been refused plates. I understand that, a few months ago, a man was taken off the road but, after an interview, was put back on the road. His car, however, is broken and is not running. That looks like a little favouritism. If the Minister jogs his memory, I am sure he will recall the case to which I refer.

I desire to refer to Slievardagh coal—not to the mines, but to the supply. In that area, there are short supplies. The Minister cannot get all the coal he wants, but coal has been raised there for years—not a big amount but sufficient for a certain area. I understand that the Minister has ordered prosecutions against those people who are raising and selling coal because this is a turf area. These poor people could not raise the coal, nor could the mining company, at the price which the Minister could give for it. I wonder would the Minister be prepared to subsidise the coal which these people are raising. He is paying a large subsidy on turf. Why not, during the emergency, subsidise the coal which these people raise? For 20 years, they have been raising coal and making their living by distributing it with horses and carts from Templemore to Cahir. The Minister now proposes to prohibit them from doing that because it is against the law to distribute coal in a turf area.

Why does the Minister for Supplies not allow these men to raise all the coal they can and, if necessary, pay a subsidy? Would it not be better to pay a subsidy for the production of coal than to be paying 23/6 a ton for bad turf? In addition, it must be remembered that men are being put out of work. Some of them are old men, but others have horses and carts with which they ply through the country. They are now afraid to raise coal or to sell it, because this is a turf area. Fuel is scarce at the present time. Why not encourage these men to produce it? I hope the Minister will reconsider the matter, because otherwise I foresee poverty amongst many people in that area.

I have been asked to make representations to the Minister regarding the distribution of goods in small towns in Co. Kerry. I understand that at present wholesalers are no longer offering goods that they previously offered to traders; that it is all a question of retail trading, with the result that small traders can no longer obtain necessary supplies at ordinary prices. These traders have asked me to make representations to the Department, with a view to having a check-up of stocks held by wholesalers, so that these might be properly distributed and prices fixed that would make it possible for country traders to obtain goods on reasonable terms. A man who is in the drapery trade in a small way in Co. Kerry informed me that he did a good business until recently, but now he finds it impossible to obtain goods at any price. He had been informed by wholesalers with whom he had dealt in the past that goods were no longer available, and that what they formerly sold at wholesale prices are now being sold retail and could no longer be supplied.

That is a serious state of affairs for people in the country who cannot obtain clothing and other materials. The same applies to general merchandise. A man who had always been supplied at wholesale prices by merchants who imported goods cannot now obtain them. Were it not for the fact that Mr. Stephens was able to get supplies in Cork and other places from firms with whom he had not dealt for the last 10 or 20 years, he would have had to close down, and small farmers who required agricultural implements and goods would be left without them. A number of his employees would also be out of work. I ask the Minister to have a general stocktaking of that position. If necessary he should have a check up on stocks that have been accumulated in larger centres, and arrange for their distribution in remote areas. There must be hundreds of places throughout the country in which it is necessary to make goods available at reasonable prices. I am not asking the Minister to penalise anybody, but to re-arrange the whole system of distribution, so that the public will be able to obtain their requirements. I heard Deputy Dillon and other Deputies referring to the position in the drapery trade. What Deputies stated applies to areas in County Kerry. I know that it is difficult to deal with the question, but taking drastic action, if necessary, would be a lesser evil than leaving small towns without supplies.

In the restrictions imposed with regard to the use of petrol in vehicles for the conveyance of goods, two areas in Kerry are affected. In Mastergeehy, which is 16 miles from the nearest railway station, and 14 miles from the nearest town, a merchant who had a lorry for the distribution of goods in that centre was deprived of his licence and is no longer operating. It is now, impossible to have goods made available to people in that remote centre. In Glencar a van that previously distributed goods from Limerick and Cork is not running and shopkeepers in that backward district can only get supplies one day in the month. That is a great hardship on poor people and small farmers in that area. Even if they could go to the nearest town they are not known to traders there, and consequently could not get supplies. I urge the Minister to exclude these two areas from the provisions imposing restrictions on transport, because there are extenuating circumstances which should induce the Department to regard these cases as outstanding ones.

Another matter which concerns us very much in Kerry, especially in the coastal districts, is the question of fishing gear and hemp for the making and repairing of nets. We are disappointed that the Department has not been able to provide some quantity of flaxen hemp. The position is that the cotton hemp which was made available is not of very much use to fishermen operating in the open sea. That type of hemp is suitable for inland fishing but not for fishing in tidal waters. If this war is to be a prolonged one, and if we cannot obtain the required type of hemp from Britain or some other country, I think we should concentrate on producing it from our own flax in this country. I think that matter should have been gone into long ago. I understand that flax is extensively produced in certain areas in County Cork. Why not utilise that flax to supply our own needs rather than allow it to be sent to Belfast or some other place? Thousands of people in our coastal counties are employed in the fishing industry, and everything possible should be done to preserve their livelihood. I know that the Department did its utmost to supply their needs, but hemp made from manufacturing cotton is not of very much value to the fishermen in our area.

I am doubtful whether another matter to which I want to refer comes under the heading of Supplies. It is in regard to the transport of fish from Valentia Harbour to certain centres in England. The London, Midland and Scottish Railways have refused to handle consignments of fish at the North Wall later than 6.30 p.m. I tabled a question in regard to that matter recently, and I was informed that it was a matter between the London, Midland and Scottish and the Great Southern Railways Company. There is also a question with regard to hours of overtime. I think that the matter is sufficiently——

Would the Deputy say to what Minister he addressed his question?

Mr. Flynn

Well, it concerns——

Which Minister?

Like certain other Deputies, he is confused between the Minister for Supplies and the Minister for Industry and Commerce.

Mr. Flynn

I think it was addressed to the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries.

The Minister for Supplies is not responsible for Fisheries.

Mr. Flynn

I think this matter concerns the Minister for Supplies, in so far as it is inter-related with the catching and supply of fish for home consumption and for export.

Surely the question of working hours is not one for the Department of Supplies?

Mr. Flynn

I submit that this matter concerns the Minister for Supplies, because the fact that the supplies of fish are held up at that particular point involves consequential loss to the fish merchants concerned. I have been asked to appeal to the Minister for Supplies to make representations to the High Commissioner in London, Mr. Dulanty, with a view to having this matter adjusted between the British shipping companies and the railway company here.

It is obviously a matter for the Minister for Industry and Commerce.

Perhaps the Minister for Supplies would communicate it to the Minister for Supplies?

Mr. Flynn

There was also another point which I would like the Minister to consider. In the fixing of prices for agricultural produce or other commodities, would the Minister take cognisance of the fact that there are certain commodities now available which will, I hope, always be available in this country, and if the agriculturists could have the prices of their produce stabilised it would be an incentive to further production. It would enable them to work on a two-year plan or a three-year plan, and would give them an added incentive to production during the emergency period. That is a point to which all speakers have failed to refer. The average farmer in the country would like to know that, when this post-war planning takes place—for instance this check-up which I asked the Minister to make of all the accumulated stocks which are available—cognisance will be taken of the general position, and that the prices of agricultural produce will be stabilised, so that the farmer will know what price will be available for a particular product in a year or two years hence. I think that is a very important matter.

I am not usually anxious to take part in every debate in this House, but I think the matter to which I have referred are very urgent as far as our county—and indeed most other counties—is concerned. I think that the Minister, when he is replying, should give us some idea as to what will be the position in regard to those people to whom I have made particular reference, the small traders who cannot at the moment obtain any supplies at all. The result of that is that the small farmers and workers in our locality cannot obtain the necessaries of life or the commodities which would enable them to obtain their livelihood.

The fixing of prices in the drapery trade for woollens and cloths of all descriptions is long overdue. The Minister should give the House some idea as to when a price-fixing scheme will be inaugurated for those commodities. The position is becoming acute and it is time that some definite scheme was introduced.

I sympathise with a good deal of what Deputy Flynn has said with regard to the transport question, but I venture to prophesy that his speech will not achieve his hoped-for result. I, too, have endeavoured in this House to fight the battle of certain backward areas in my county, just as he has been attempting to fight the battle of certain backward areas in the County Kerry, which are left now without adequate transport; but I failed so completely —and I see that the railway company has established a complete monopoly, no matter how inadequate it may be— that I have given up any hopes of seeing any reasonable transport provided by the Minister for backward areas, and I am afraid Deputy Flynn will have failed equally as far as County Kerry is concerned.

I have not risen to make a long speech and intend to speak very concisely. There are two main matters and one subsidiary matter which I would like to put before the Minister for Supplies and ask him for an explanation. The fact that I put these concisely will not, I trust, be a reason for the Minister's not dealing with them. The first point is that, when rationing of clothing was brought in, the drapers told us that there was a full three years' supply. Therefore, the stuff which is being sold now in the shops was brought in before rationing was introduced, yet the price in many instances is something like 100 per cent. more. That is hitting many persons very hard. One item I would mention especially is the enormous price being charged to the ordinary agricultural labourer for boots, which have risen to almost a prohibitive price, though this is old stock brought in at pre-war prices, as the three years are not up yet and the existing supplies that the drapers had in stock at that time have not been exhausted. I would ask the Minister for an explanation as to why that price has gone up.

In regard to the supply of light, the Electricity Supply Board, owing to the low water level now in the Shannon, made application that light and heat be used as little as possible in Dublin and elsewhere. Dublin shops are ordered to close at 5.30 instead of 6 p.m., in order to save light, even in daytime; but this week a new Act has come into force, under which many shops that used to close at 10 o'clock are now to remain open until 10.30., during a period when there must be a very great consumption of light. That change should have been postponed until the question of light was solved and we had plenty of electric power. It is very inconsistent that the ordinary drapers and grocers should be told to shut at 5.30 and that publicans should be told to keep open for an extra half-an-hour.

The third matter—of minor importance—I wish to submit to the Minister is that he should allow Deputies, for the purpose of doing their work as Deputies, to use producer gas. I am not asking the Minister to answer that to-day. I know he has ruled the other way, and I do not think my eloquence would be sufficient to convince him, but I have great hopes that, by turning the matter over in his own mind, he may convert himself to my view. Deputies have a great deal of work to do, and are supposed to visit their constituents.

At the present time, especially, they are trying to put their views before their constituents, and I cannot see why they should not be allowed to use producer gas on their private cars. That would save a great deal of petrol, as many Deputies live a considerable distance from places where a car can be hired; and, if you have to hire a car to come five miles to you and travel five miles away again, that means ten miles in petrol wasted. On the other hand, if a Deputy who has his own car and lives in a country district, is allowed to fit producer gas to it, it could not do any harm and would enable him to do his work.

On the question of the fuel supplies necessary, there is no need to worry in the country districts, as wood charcoal is very easy to get. It is so simple to make that I could start on it myself and, if any Deputies are very "hard up" and would chop, they could come into the industry. There is plenty of worthless wood lying around, which could be turned into good charcoal. I do not want an answer to that question to-day, but I would ask the Minister to consider it and let the House know the result as soon as he can.

Almost every activity of the Department that could be commented upon has been referred to by one Deputy or another during the debate, and I think the Minister must come to the conclusion that the Department over which he presides is not exactly a popular one. I suppose that is inevitable, in the nature of things; but there is no smoke without fire, and the fact that certain grievances were put forward from both sides of the House must lead people to think that there is some laxity in the Department. However, I will not inflict my particular grievances on the House at the moment. Some of us have held that many of the activities of the Department could have been carried on better by business people, but everyone might not agree with that view. That brings me to a statement which I am very reluctant to make in this House. It is a matter which has been commented on very much in the Press and by certain important public bodies.

I have said that I refer to this matter with reluctance as I feel that any remarks I make might be taken as a castigation of the general body of civil servants. During my 15 years as a member of this House I have never had to refer in an adverse matter to a single civil servant. I have never received anything but courtesy from any civil servant with whom I ever came in contact in this State. I believe no country possesses a better body of civil servants than this country and that no body of civil servants discharge their duty in a more efficient and courteous manner than ours but I suppose there are black sheep in every flock. I said a moment ago that some of us have stated in debates here that we believed that business people could carry on certain parts of the work of the Department of Supplies better than the Department itself. In regard to that, a certain civil servant came into the public light with an article which to my mind was a vilification of the ordinary business people of this country. I would not have referred to it at all were it not that the particular official who wrote this article——

It is the Minister for Finance who is responsible for the control of the Civil Service.

Perhaps the Minister would allow me for a moment. The particular civil servant who wrote this article implied that from information at the official's disposal on the files of the Department of Supplies——

The Deputy must understand that the Minister for Supplies is not responsible for the civil Service.

With all due respect, Sir, I am merely stating, and I think it is incumbent on somebody to state, that the Minister——

The Deputy will have to address these remarks to the Minister for Finance.

I am making these remarks to give the Minister for Supplies an opportunity——

He has no control over these matters.

Surely he has control over the files of his own Department?

I am making these remarks to give the Minister an opportunity of stating publicly in this House that he has such regard for the proper conduct of his own Department, and for the maintenance of proper relations between his Department and business people, that he realise that the work of his Department cannot be properly carried out unless good feeling exists between his Department and business people and that any statement by anybody that would tend to create a cleavage between business people and the Department would be a grave happening, particularly when the statement is made by an official, who as far as I know, must be an official of the Department of Supplies. The official in making the statement to which I refer said that the writer's information was derived from the files of the Department of Supplies. I would not have raised this matter had it not been raised very publicly in many places. It was raised by such an important body as the Chamber of Commerce in one of the cities of this country. It was a grave statement and I think it should draw from the Minister, when he is replying to this debate, some remarks that will satisfy the people of this country that the files of his Department are under such proper control that it would be almost inconceivable that they could be used for any such purpose.

It is with extreme reluctance that I made this statement at all, but I feel, as every Deputy must feel, that the work of the Minister's Department is of such an onerous nature, and is of such importance to the people of the State, that anything which tends to create friction between the business people, the producers and the farmers of this country and the Department of Supplies, is, to say the least of it, unfortunate. This official did not merely confine the article to vilifying the business people of the State. The writer went even so far as to refer to the agricultural community as a lazy and incompetent body. As a member of the agricultural community who is endeavouring as far as I can—and this applies to every individual farmer —to co-operate with the Department of Supplies to produce essential food for the country, I think that any statement of this nature made by an official of this Department, or any other Department, must be condemned in the strongest possible manner. I hope that when the Minister is replying he will avail of the opportunity to refer to the controversy that has taken place in regard to this article. I want to make it definitely clear that I do not think there is a Deputy in the House who would make any charge whatever against the general body of the civil servants in this State. It is largely because I have every respect for the general body of civil servants in the country that I raise the matter, in order to give the Minister an opportunity of testifying, as I gladly testify, to the integrity of the general body of civil servants.

I understand that a motion to sit late must be moved before 12 o'clock. If there is any likelihood of agreement to conclude the debate on the main Vote and the Supplementary Estimate before 2 o'clock I shall not move the motion but if there is no such likelihood of agreement, it must be moved.

The Minister had better move it. There is no objection on this side to sitting late.

Progress reported; the Committee to sit again.
Top
Share