I move that the Dáil do now adjourn. I understand that the Minister for Industry and Commerce is to make a statement in connection with the urgent situation that has arisen.
Adjournment—Standing Order No. 29. - Curtailment of Coal Imports.
I gathered that there was a motion before the House. Is that motion being moved now?
I move it. If the Minister wants me to debate anything before he says ——
If there is a certain manceuvring for position on behalf of certain Deputies, I desire to get some information. I am prepared to make a statement, but if it is understood that I am to conclude the debate and deal with any queries that may arise out of my statement, I should like to know the position. If the Deputy states what he wants information on, I shall deal with it.
Is Deputy McGilligan withdrawing his motion?
The adjournment has now been moved for the purpose of considering this matter. I was given to understand the Minister would make a statement. I thought that was the situation.
This is a question of order and I do not know what exactly is the best way of dealing with it.
The position is that there is a motion by Deputy McGilligan before the House.
I have no objection whatever to opening the proceedings with a statement if it is understood that I shall also conclude the debate when that statement will have been criticised, if it is to be criticised, or if, in the course of the discussion, some Deputies express a desire to have particular points amplified or clarified.
If the Minister makes a statement, he will be entitled to reply to the debate.
Undoubtedly.
I understand that there is a desire on behalf of Deputies to have information concerning the situation which has arisen in relation to coal supplies and the arrangements which are being made to deal with that situation. I think that it is necessary to remind the House, in the first instance, that we, in this country, have been operating for a considerable time upon very curtailed supplies of coal. Since the end of 1940, the supplies of coal available to us, both in quantity and quality, have been barely sufficient to maintain essential services and industries using coal as fuel. During last year, we received from all sources a quantity of coal which was slightly under 40 per cent. of our normal consumption. Even that figure would give a false picture of the situation because the coal which we had available to us was so poor in quality that it represented, in practice, a still smaller fraction of our normal requirements. By various measures of control which have been operating for some time past, the available supplies of coal have been confined to essential users, to persons engaged in the operation of essential industries, to the production of electricity and gas and to the maintenance of transport services. It is necessary to understand that fact so that Deputies will appreciate why any further curtailments of our supplies must necessarily involve a curtailment of essential services. The essential services had already been limited in their operation to an extent which caused considerable economic dislocation and occasional hardship to some people and a further curtailment now must mean an expansion of the area of dislocation and of the area of hardship. There is no avoiding that. There is no possible device by which we can, with a smaller quantity of coal, maintain the essential services in full operation. Therefore, the arrangements which the Government have been making to adjust our situation to the reduced supply of coal are all necessarily designed to effect a contraction of services regarded heretofore as essential.
The term "essential" is an elastic one. We have become accustomed during the course of the past few years to do without commodities and facilities which we would have regarded as essential, or almost essential, before the war, but many of the things which, even in recent months, we have regarded as essential must now be eliminated. There is no avoiding that. Inasmuch as we must contemplate a very substantial diminution in our supplies of fuel in coming months, the aim of the Government has been to make such arrangements as would ensure that the best possible use would be made of the available supplies, that economy in their use would be enforced in all directions and that distribution amongst the essential users would take place in such manner as to cause the least hardship and the least economic dislocation. Hardship and economic dislocation cannot be avoided but, by wise management of the available supplies, we may be able to minimise it. The House will also understand that whatever arrangements are now made to restrict the use of coal and other fuels must necessarily be tentative. No reliable estimate of available supplies can be made in respect of any protracted period ahead. We have particulars of the stocks available to us now — the stocks of coal in the hands of the Government organisation which was set up to handle certain aspects of our fuel problem, in the hands of the major coal users such as the Electricity Supply Board, the gas companies and railway companies and certain other industrial users. We can add to the known supplies of coal certain reserve stocks of timber and some supplies of turf which can be made available for industrial use. It is, occasionally, possible to substitute coal by pitch or coke breeze or alternative fuels of one kind and another, although the quantities of such alternative fuels which can be procured are necessarily limited. It is in relation to that general picture that I want to inform the Dáil of the measures which are being brought into operation, again emphasising that these are tentative measures, that it is not possible to state precisely whether or not they will be adequate to deal with the situation, whether it will be possible to modify them at some future date or whether still further restrictions may not be necessary. On the basis of the tentative estimates which had been prepared as to the situation in the immediate future, decisions have been made and these decisions are now being implemented.
The purpose for which the largest quantities of coal is required is the maintenance of railway transport. It will perhaps help Deputies to appreciate the dimensions of the problem created in connection with railway transport when I say that, even on the basis of the restricted services which the Great Southern Railways have announced will come into operation from Monday next, a weekly consumption of coal amounting to 4,000 tons is involved. In deciding upon the dimensions of the reduction, we had to take into account, not merely the requirements of the immediate future, but also the requirements of the period later in the year when the demands upon the rail traffic reach their peak.
If we could determine with certainty the quantity of coal which would be available to us to the end of the year, we would still have to enforce reductions in rail transport facilities at the present time, to a greater extent than the average weekly coal supply would suggest, because from the average weekly supply now available would have to be taken some proportion, for the purpose of accumulating stocks to meet the much greater transport needs which develop in the months of September, October and November. It is in those months that demands for transport facilities are at their highest, and when the public interest most urgently requires that those demands should, if possible, be met in full. If, by limiting services at the present time, we can make possible the provision of greater transport facilities to move grain, beet and turf in those months, then it is clearly desirable that we should accept now whatever limitations are necessary, in order to provide ourselves with that guarantee. Our difficulty is that we cannot be certain, even by imposing very severe restrictions now, that we will be able to face the peak traffic load and cope with it. It is, however, a reasonable course to adopt — as I am sure the House will agree — to put aside as much as possible of the supplies at present available to meet the requirements of that period.
Arrangements which have been made for the reduction of transport on the Great Southern Railways system have been worked out in consultation with the officers of that company. The reduction in coal consumption which they have been asked to effect involves a substantial reduction in the transport facilities they can provide. In fact, the reduction in transport facilities must represent a higher proportion of the existing facilities than the reduction in consumption of coal is of the supplies previously utilised by them. That is because there are certain overheads — if I may so use that term — which must be provided in any case. The total quantity of coal consumed by the Great Southern Railways or any railway company in the shunting and marshalling of trains represents a very high part of its total consumption — amounting, I think, almost to one-third — and no great diminution in that consumption is possible, even if the number of trains used for the transportation of passengers and ordinary merchandise is substantially reduced.
The arrangements which we have tentatively provided for contemplate the provision of a main line service for passengers on two days in the week with a reduced daily service upon suburban lines. There will be a reduction of the ordinary goods trains, by limiting them to operating on four days in the week, which represents a diminution of 40 per cent. in number of passengers and 20 per cent. in the amount of traffic which they carry.
A substantial proportion of the goods traffic of the company is, however, carried not in those scheduled goods trains but in special trains. All the single-commodity trains are special trains, the transportation of turf is done by specials, the transportation of live stock is, in the main, done by special trains and, in the appropriate season, beet and grain are, in the main, moved by special trains also. It is not contemplated that a corresponding reduction in the special goods train service will be made as in the ordinary goods train service. We are endeavouring to secure that full facilities will be afforded for the transportation of turf and, while some reduction in the number of cattle specials will undoubtedly be necessary, nevertheless every effort will be made to ensure that that service will be kept going. The "perishables" trains which run upon southern lines will be continued and will operate daily, although in future they will not take passengers.
A number of branch lines will be closed and road services will be substituted. An announcement appeared in this morning's papers of a number of new road services, to be instituted to provide facilities for the towns previously served by those branch lines. In the case of the Portlaoighise-Mountmellick branch, it is estimated that the existing bus service will be sufficient and it is expected that the same will prove true of the Goold's Cross-Cashel branch. In respect to the Fermoy-Mitchelstown and Banteer-Newmarket branches, existing bus services will be diverted to provide the facilities required. On the Woodenbridge-Shillelagh run, a new bus service will be provided. On the Schull-Skibbereen branch, it is estimated that the existing service will prove sufficient. On the Dublin-Tullow route, a new bus service will be provided. In respect to the Waterford-Macmine service, the situation will be met by the provision of a bus service to Enniscorthy, connecting with the main line trains. The various measures which have been taken to reduce the train facilities available are, of course, only the first step in coping with the transport problem resulting from the diminution of fuel supplies. The second step must, I think, take the form of a re-organisation of production in various industries in order to reduce the amount of transport that will be necessary. Heretofore, the regulation of output of various industries was not related to transport requirements, but it will be possible, in some cases, to effect a re-organisation of production in such a manner as to reduce the demands which these industries will make upon transport facilities.
That may involve changes of one kind or another. The suggestion has been made, for example, that the wheat supplies of the country should be milled where they are available. At present we have a national flour. A similar grist is used in all mills, and that grist contains the same proportion of native wheat as of imported wheat. That involves considerable transportation of grain, bringing the imported wheat to the inland mills and the native wheat to the city mills. If it should be practicable to bring about an alteration in the proportions of imported and native wheat, according to the transport situation, then some saving of transport will be involved. I mention that as an indication not of a decision already made but as the type of reorganisation of production which we have in mind and which may effect an economy in transport which would ease the situation.
I have not mentioned the Great Northern Railway Company. I cannot say what the situation will be there. The quantity of coal supplied from our resources to the Great Northern Railway Company is relatively very small, and a corresponding reduction in the quantity of that coal would not necessarily occasion any similar changes in the facilities provided by that company.
The next most important users of coal are the gas companies. Up to now the gas companies have been using also approximately 4,000 tons per week. That is a substantial quantity of coal, but if it was represented by gas-producing coal of the kind normally used by gas companies, it would make possible the production of gas considerably in excess of the production now taking place. In fact, that coal is very frequently unsuitable for the production of gas, and many difficulties have been experienced by gas companies in using it. The position is likely to arise that we will have to enforce upon all the gas companies of the country the same limitation in supply as is at present operating in Dublin. I hope that it will be possible to maintain the existing Dublin supply unchanged. I base that hope upon the expectation that the measures to which I referred yesterday will, when brought into operation, effectively prevent the use of gas in the "off" hours. No less than 17 per cent. of the total quantity of gas now produced in Dublin is being used in the "off" hours. It is quite clear that if by some more rigid enforcement of the regulations we could prevent that consumption of gas, then the existing supply could still be maintained even if the quantity of coal to the gas company was reduced or if there was a further deterioration in its quality.
I am aware, as all Deputies are aware, of the hardship which the curtailment of the gas supply occasions in many households. I should point out, however, that the reduction of the consumption of gas in Dublin has, in the main, not been effected at the expense of the slot machine users. They have, of course, been affected in so far as they can only obtain supplies during certain hours, but, in respect of the quantity of gas which they use, they, have not been affected to anything like the same extent as other gas users.
If a calculation is made upon the basis of the calorific value of gas, the reduction in consumption by the slot machine users has been 7.5 per cent. The reduction in consumption by people with quarterly meters has been 30 per cent., and the reduction by industrial users has been 72 per cent. If the calculation is made upon the basis of the number of cubic feet of gas used — Deputies know that the calorific value of gas has been reduced on more than one occasion since 1941 — then the slot machine users have, in fact, used more gas in 1943 than in the corresponding period of 1941, while the ordinary consumers and industrial consumers have used substantially less. That situation has resulted from the existing method of controlling the output of gas which I am anxious to preserve rather than attempt a rationing scheme upon a unit basis. A rationing scheme on a unit basis, which would take into full account the varied needs of individual families, would be difficult to devise. Some families require gas for cooking purposes more urgently than others and it would be difficult, without very detailed examination of the circumstances of individual households, to adopt a unit rationing scheme which would work fairly. I prefer, therefore, to effect gas rationing by means of a curtailment of the hours of supply, because it does provide a service during those hours to those who require gas for cooking. I hope to maintain it although, as I said yesterday, its maintenance will depend very largely on the success of our efforts to prevent the continued use of gas in the "off"-hours. Other gas companies may consider it best to adopt some different mode of control in relation to the circumstances of their undertakings, but all of them will, in view of the reduced coal supplies, have to reduce their output in a manner comparable with the reduction in Dublin.
In the case of the Electricity Supply Board, the situation is doubly unfortunate because Deputies will remember that the Board found it necessary in March last to re-impose the rationing of electricity by reason of the abnormally dry months which had preceded that announcement. In normal times a diminution in the output from the water-power scheme would be supplemented by an increased output from the steam stations, but it was not possible to authorise a bigger consumption of coal, and, consequently, rationing was introduced by the Electricity Supply Board by reason of the difficulty of maintaining a supply resulting from the drought. Now we have got to reduce the consumption of coal to the Electricity Supply Board, and that will involve further restrictions upon the use of electricity. An announcement of these further restrictions will be made by the Electricity Supply Board on Saturday next.
These restrictions will involve a 15 per cent. cut in the use of electrical power by industries. We will provide that certain industries designated by me as Minister for Supplies will continue to receive full supplies, subject to whatever economies can be brought into operation. But the industries that will continue to receive full supplies will be specially notified to that effect by the Electricity Supply Board. Unless an industrial undertaking is notified formally that it is in that category, it will be necessary for it to effect a reduction in its consumption of electricity by 15 per cent. compared with its 1941 consumption.
The use of electricity for space heating by electricity consumers will be prohibited altogether between May 1st and August 31st. That prohibition will cover the use of electric fires, heaters, radiators, tubular heaters and all forms of space heating, directly or indirectly, by electricity. The use of electricity for traction purposes will be reduced by one-third compared with the 1943 consumption. This will involve a further diminution in tram services. The use of electricity for cooking purposes will also be restricted by 15 per cent. In the case of all other users of electricity, except public lighting, which will be restricted by 25 per cent., a 50 per cent. cut in consumption will be imposed. These further cuts in electricity consumption will operate from May 1st.
Is that 50 per cent. of the present consumption?
50 per cent. of the 1941 consumption. There are essential industries that must be kept going — flour milling and baking are obvious examples — and in so far as they require supplies of coal or electricity, those supplies must be given. It may be possible, by various devices, to reduce their consumption of coal or electricity without diminishing their output. We contemplate the possibility of milling flour less finely than has been the practice heretofore. By imposing restrictions upon the fineness of the flour, it will be possible to effect a considerable reduction in fuel consumption.
Similarly, the sugar company must be provided with fuel. Normally the sugar company proceeds until the beginning of the campaign season to accumulate very large stocks of coal. We will have to ensure that they will have enough coal to produce sugar. A substantial quantity of the coal they use is required for the purpose of pulp drying. It may not be possible to provide coal for that purpose, but, in so far as sugar production is concerned, the aim will be to give the company permission to accumulate, in the months between now and October, the quantity which will enable it to produce our sugar requirements.
There are certain other essential industries which will be reduced by 10 per cent. These are industries which are regarded as of special importance and it is desirable to keep them at the maximum possible production, even if it does involve a more drastic cut upon other industrial users. I have in mind dairies producing butter, dryers of grain, seed wheat and barley assemblers, wholemeal millers, oatmeal millers and people in similar categories. Other industrial users of coal will be reduced by 25 per cent. — that is, a 25 per cent. cut on the supplies heretofore available to them.
We aim also to secure as far as possible the complete elimination of the use of coal for industrial purposes in the turf areas. There are large numbers of industrial firms in the turf areas which have already turned over completely to the use of turf, and we think all could, with some effort, effect a similar change. We hope to realise a substantial saving in the use of coal by these means.
The fuel section of the Department of Supplies has skilled officers available to advise industrialists as to the measures they might adopt to effect economy in the use of fuel, and particularly a transfer from coal to turf, without a diminution in productive efficiency, and the services of these officers will be available to all industrialists who will avail of them. These officers are, of their own initiative, contacting the users of coal at the present time for the purpose of examining their methods of using coal, advising them as to economies that can be secured, and generally estimating whether they are making the best use of the supplies they are getting, so as to guide the Department in future allocations of coal to these firms.
Many Deputies, no doubt, will suggest that we must make a special effort to increase production from our own coal mines. Our coal mines have been producing on a scale higher than was normal pre-war and they would, no doubt, have progressed much further in the matter of increasing output but for certain obvious difficulties. The first and most important of these difficulties is the lack of supply of skilled labour. Only skilled workers are effective below ground. It could even be said that nobody could safely be allowed to operate below ground who had not a certain knowledge of mining. We have, after consultation with the trade unions concerned, modified in some respect our safety regulations so as to permit of persons being employed in coal mining below ground after a shorter period of training than would be enforced in normal times. But there is a definite limitation upon the output capacity of the mines by reason of the scarcity of skilled workers. There is also a limitation resulting from the inability to get additional supplies of mining equipment.
Nevertheless, something may be done. I do not want to say any more on that matter at the moment, because conferences have been proceeding to-day with the proprietors of these mines and other interested parties with a view to examining that whole question, and I hope that as a result of the conferences practical measures will emerge which will result in a still further increase in coal output. I do not want the House to imagine that there is possible any increase in the output of coal from the Irish mines which would effect more than a very slight change in our circumstances. The total output of all the Irish mines, working to the fullest capacity, would probably not exceed 4,000 tons a week and, as I already mentioned, that is the consumption of the Great Southern Railways Company alone upon the basis of the reduced services that will operate from Monday next. Certain experiments are also being carried out as to the practicability of using Irish coal for purposes that it was not considered suitable for previously. We will have to make the best of the available supplies, and the technical knowledge available to us is being mobilised to deal with that particular aspect of the problem: how that coal, having certain characteristics and considered unsuitable for various purposes in the past, can now be utilised for these purposes.
There is a tendency on the part of coal producers in certain areas, and I should like to mention particularly the Sligo area, to do a spot of black-marketing in coal at night time. There are a number of small mines operating in that area, I mean small in relation to the normal coal mine, upon all of which it is not possible to keep a very effective check. While a number of detections have been made and prosecutions instituted for the sale of coal to persons who had not got permits to purchase it, I am fairly satisfied that there are sales of that kind taking place which we have not detected. I should like to ask the co-operation of the people of Sligo and the public authorities in Sligo in ensuring suppression of that traffic.
We are proposing to reserve for essential industrial purposes the reserve stocks of timber and turf bricquettes accumulated over the past three or four years. These stocks were held to deal with such a situation as this, and we are taking them into account in reckoning our fuel resources; taking them into account, of course, with a proper appreciation of their value as fuel in relation to coal. With the co-operation of coal users, with an acceptance on the part of the public of those restrictions upon essential services and industries which have become necessary, we can possibly maintain conditions here on a tolerable basis in the hope that the situation will change and that some modification of these restrictions, if not their entire removal, may become possible later in the year.
In present circumstances, as Deputies will readily appreciate, it is not possible to look any distance ahead with the certainty that you will see the circumstances that will then exist. The possibility of a serious contraction of our coal supplies, arising from causes that are within the knowledge of Deputies, was foreseen. In consequence of that anticipation, a special effort was made this year to secure an increased production of turf. Not merely was a publicity drive undertaken but, by improved methods of organisation in various parts of the country, the production of turf was got under way earlier and more smoothly and in a more substantial measure than in previous years. Although turf cannot be substituted for coal in a satisfactory manner for many industrial purposes, and although the total production of turf that we could hope to accomplish would still fall far short of our total fuel requirements, nevertheless, every ton of turf produced over and above the quantity produced last year will help to minimise our difficulties and will certainly help to make more secure the domestic fuel upon which the welfare of many households will depend. I should like, therefore, in conclusion to impress on Deputies the importance of taking full advantage of every opportunity that offers to them of urging the greatest possible production of turf. Even though there may be some difficulty in transporting all the turf produced to the areas where it is most urgently required, nevertheless, it will be much safer to have it produced, because it can then be moved as occasion offers and will, in any event, be an asset to the country which can be utilised for the minimisation of hardship at some time.
The Minister referred to the essential services in this country, and one of the services that I would class as essential at the moment is the service of Government itself. We are still in the region of Government by the consent of those who have to be governed, and it was the wish of members of this Party that that consent should be obtained by the Government taking the people of the country more and more into their confidence, if they wanted to get the confidence of the people in what they were doing. To that end, this Party made several efforts in the last few days to get such a statement made as has been made to-night. I want to get on record just what was done.
People in these benches found their constituents anxious about what had happened. Inside a week, the country had been plunged into what seemed to be an extremely deep crisis, and yet people could not understand the reason for it. We thought that one of the ways in which the matter could be explained to the people would be through the House here, and through a statement from the Minister. Last Saturday, therefore, an approach was made to the Government by a member of this Party to see if a statement would be made at the opening of the House this week. The answer that came back appeared to be favourable. I say, "appeared to be favourable" because the person who spoke was not speaking after consultation with his chiefs, and it was recognised that it was possible that only his own view was being given. On Tuesday, a further approach was made and it was then realised that a statement was not going to be made. The result was that notice was given yesterday that after questions the matter would be raised openly in this House by Deputy O'Higgins and that took place. I do not think I do the Minister any wrong in saying that his attitude was: "Deputies are free to ask me any question they like about this and I will answer as well as I can, but I will make no statement." The result was that a motion was put down for the adjournment of the House to-day to discuss this matter of urgent public importance. It was recognised by the Chair as being the type of motion that falls within the Standing Orders and, in the end, we have got the statement that the Minister has made.
What people are anxious to know is, not so much what the Minister detailed here to-night, namely, those peculiar divisions of effort in the country which this crisis, if it is a crisis, is going to develop, but what is the cause of the crisis and, in particular, what caused it to come so suddenly. They would be very anxious to get, although they recognise that they cannot get full details at a moment like this, such information as would enable them to form their own judgment on just how serious and grave the crisis is. Judged by that standard, of course, the Minister's statement is wholly and entirely unsatisfactory — at least it would be in ordinary circumstances. But I think everybody here is reasonable and recognises that the exigencies of the situation do possibly impede the Minister in saying to the House what he would normally know the House would expect him to say. However, what the Minister has said is sufficient to indicate that, leaving all thought of what might have happened aside at the moment, there is a situation of extreme gravity in the country.
It is not my intention to over-emphasise the matter; neither would I like to minimise it. There is a middle line that can be walked, and I could walk it more easily if I had certain information, which I am sure the Minister has, but which I know he is entitled to withhold. There is a situation of difficulty and, as the Minister said, there is going to be graver difficulty almost immediately. These difficulties are going to réact very seriously upon the lives of the masses of the people in the country. They are the people whom we represent and whom we govern. People in this country are so made that they can very easily be led where they can only with difficulty be driven, and an appeal to them will often succeed where any attempt at coercion will only meet with refusal. I suggest to the Minister that if he does not find it possible, and he may not, to answer precise questions in the House, he could answer these questions elsewhere. I should have thought that the Minister could have given the House estimates with regard to certain obvious matters, and that Deputies then could have let their minds play about these estimates, could have come to certain conclusions of their own, and would then be the medium for giving an explanation of some kind of satisfactory nature to those who will be affected by these restrictions. But that has not happened.
There are, however, big sections of the community who will be put in a position of extreme difficulty following on what the Minister has said. At this moment, people are rather tired of having it explained to them that there is a residue of wisdom in a very limited number of people in this country and that what the majority of the people have to do is to take it or leave it. Deputy M. O'Sullivan, the Lord Mayor of Dublin, said to-day that there was a meeting of an unfortunate type yesterday in connection with certain services in the country. I suggest that there are responsible people who represent workers in that particular area, and that it would be well worth while, in confidence, to give these people, not orders as to what is to be done, but some intimation of just how the situation affects them objectively, and to ask them, on that objective statement of facts, to co-operate with those who propose to put certain restrictions upon them.
Two other public utility services have been mentioned, electricity and gas. Has the Minister taken those who are at the head of, and responsible for, these undertakings into his confidence? Has he told them what the situation is, detailing it with certain facts and figures? I think everybody will agree that it is the task of the Minister, or of the Government, at any rate, to make, so to speak, the major division in connection with this matter, to say that out of a certain amount of coal at the disposal of the Government within a certain period a division along certain lines will be made: roughly the type of division the Minister spoke of, that is, something for transport, something for electricity, something for gas, something for certain necessary industry and something for certain other not so essential industries.
Having made that division, I suggest that it would be proper for the Minister to get these people in to himself, to give them his statement—and it can be done in confidence and the confidence will be respected—as to what is the material at his disposal, what is generally his major division of that material and then to let them follow out the reaction of that division on their particular units of work. In that way, it might be possible to get people agreeable to submit to certain matters, which at the moment the Government will find it almost impossible to enforce upon them.
If this were an ordinary debate, I should have prefaced any remarks I make on the matter by a series of question. I take it that the Minister, having had the various reports that came from this side and possibly from other sides of the House, having considered the whole matter and having decided to make the statement he has made, is giving us the fullest possible information he thinks it reasonable for him to give. If that is so, however unreasonable it may appear to us—and I must confess that I find it not very satisfactory—I suppose we must accept it, but whatever be the unsatisfactory nature of it to us, it may at least be alleviated by doing what I have suggested. I ask the Minister to try to get people's confidence by giving them his, instead of merely dishing out orders, or making representations to various people immediately under him who will then dish out orders which simply have to be obeyed.
One point of detail intrigued me. The Minister said that while he appealed to people to do what they could to see that turf development would proceed apace, he felt that there was not much prospect of an alleviation of our difficulties from the use of native coal. I do not know whether he means that it has been exploited to the full, but he used the phrase that even if all of whatever we have in the way of mines in the country were exploited to the full, we never could rise above a production of some 4,000 tons per week. Why is that limitation imposed? How does it arise? Is it a question of labour—I do not imagine it can be—and if not, where is the bottle-neck as a result of which there arises this conclusion that the most, that ever could be obtained is 4,000 tons per week?
In that connection, I wonder has the Minister had offers made to him by outside bodies to engage in the business of developing whatever native coal resources there are, if they are given certain alleviations with regard to taxation. Whatever may have been the reason for refusing such offers in ordinary times, surely even finance will bend to a crisis like this and adopt unusual methods in the unusual period in which we find ourselves.
I have not heard of any such offer.
At at any time?
Of any kind, about coal. I should be glad to hear it.
The Minister would be glad to hear it? Would the Minister go so far as to say that, in such circumstances, he would relax the ordinary system of taxation?
The Minister would be very sympathetic in helping to develop any of our mineral resources.
And would not want his financial rake-off?
I shall not go any further than that.
In any event, I understand that such proposals have been made. I understood that they had been given to the Government, but certainly proposals have been made to certain of the industrial groups in this country, and they have felt themselves held up by the fact that the present system of taxation would prevent any development such as they have in mind.
Nothing of the kind has reached me about coal.
It may after this, but it will then possibly be too late. However, that is only a matter of detail. The Minister, I hope, will let the governing authorities of the Electricity Supply Board and these other public utility societies know not merely what he said here to-night, which was only a description of the areas over which these restrictions have to be imposed, but why they have to be imposed. I may be entirely misled. People who have come to me may be optimistic beyond anything that is reasonable, but I find in the public mind this confusion, that none of them appears to be convinced of the necessity for the drastic reductions in services which are being made. It is surely possible to make these people realise what the situation is.
I thought some approach to that could have been made here, that the curtain could have been lifted at least a little and that we, peeping beneath the curtain, could have explained our viewpoint, taken whatever was given to us and made that alive through the country. But that is not to be so. I suggest again that the Minister can make that revelation behind doors to those who then would have the task of indicating that they are satisfied. In connection with railway matters, there are people who will be affected. The trouble about electricity and gas is that there is nobody—apart from people who represent staff organisations or groups of employees—except Deputies to represent through the country those of the ordinary people who will suffer by these restrictions, and I hope that before this debate ends the Minister will find it possible to give us something, because so far he has given us nothing, upon which we can found an explanation to the people who are harassing us with their inquiries as to why exactly these cuts are being made, and whether there is a real necessity for the imposition of these cuts in such a rigorous way at present.
As was briefly alluded to this afternoon, there is another aspect of this position which is causing anxiety. While it arises out of the position of the coal supply, it must nevertheless be placed in a special category. I refer to the position of the staffs arising out of the present situation. Now, one might expect that at a time like this and in a situation of this particular type the management of the company—as has happened, I know, in connection with several other industrial concerns, and which I am glad to say is the general tendency in later years when difficulties of this kind arise—would have brought in the trade union representatives concerned with the particular staffs involved, with a view to having a full and frank discussion of the whole case, so that representations could be made on behalf of these staffs. The general result, so far as I know, of such full and frank discussions is co-operation between the employees and employers in special cases of this kind.
It would appear, however, that the Great Southern Railways Company decided to take the first step in that direction by calling to the Kingsbridge yesterday a meeting of some 36 trade union representatives, representing the staffs as a whole, as there are about 14,000 men affected by this. Yet, contrary to the general expectation of all those who attended that meeting, after a certain amount of loose parleying, they were bluntly confronted with the fact that a certain set of specific things would operate as a result of the present situation, and that among these were the suspension of what is known as the guaranteed week—a very important matter so far as the set-up of railwaymen is concerned—a reduction of the six-day week in the shops to 4½ days per week, and a further reduction in the case of other members of the staff. In addition to that, however, these workers were also to lose their bonuses. Now, these bonuses operate over a number of grades, and I think that Deputies will best understand the position when I say that the average figure operating over all the grades is 14/- a week. As an indication of the mentality of the people approaching that situation, their trouble apparently was one of coal supplies, or so we are led to believe, and they immediately asked their employees to sacrifice the bonus in order to meet the special situation arising out of the present emergency. The management of the company were immediately requested to give an indication, under two or three headings, of what this might mean. One heading was to give some idea of the number of grades or groups of men who would be affected by these new conditions. Another was to give the probable period over which this might operate. And the third was that these proposals might be put in writing. The manager of the company bluntly refused to put anything into writing. I understand that the representatives of the staffs kept their heads as best they could in a most unexampled situation and that when, after an adjournment, they renewed their very reasonable request that a set of proposals of that kind might be presented to them in writing, the request was again refused and it was indicated to them that if they did not care to accept that position, then, in the last analysis, there was another resort open to the company, which was to serve each member of the staff with a week's notice and to employ as many of them as the company desired on a day-to-day basis. I believe that in the long experience of representatives of trades unions who have appeared there from time to time for many years past they have never had an experience of this character before.
On a point of order, Sir, it would appear to me that the Deputy is now moving into a sphere which has nothing to do with the matter that is now before the House. I saw the statement in the newspapers to which the Deputy refers, but that was merely to the effect that no statement would be issued. That was my reading of it. I do not know if any member of the House has any further information on that than I have, but I suggest that there is nobody here who is in a position to reply on behalf of the company.
That is perfectly true with regard to the statement in the newspapers, but might I inform the Minister that this matter has now advanced to a much further stage, which enables me to make a further statement, because the trades unions to-day have advised all their members, in view of what transpired yesterday, not to accept the proposals?
Has the Minister any function in that connection?
Surely, he has.
The Government, or no member of the Government, has any responsibility for the details of railway management, and we are not accepting the responsibility.
I want to bring before the House the gravity of the situation that may arise as a result of proposals of that character which, as I say, are unprecedented. I think that that will be appreciated when I say that the over-all wage is 50/- a week for operating men, and they are now to lose one-third of their weekly employment by the loss of their two days and of their standard rate. I do not want to confuse the House, but I wish to point out that the position of these men is not like that of civil servants. There is no cost-of-living basis, and as a result of this reduction, they will now lose one-third of their standard rate of 50/- a week, amounting to 16/- a week and, in addition to that, they will also lose 14/- a week, which means that the average railway workman will have to maintain himself and his family on a basic rate of 30/- a week.
I think that these proposals are extremely drastic, and the railwaymen will most certainly say that in all the circumstances they are not warranted. I do suggest that if the proper procedure had been adopted at the meeting yesterday, the men would have been quite prepared to co-operate with the company in seeing what was best to be done. The management of the company know full well—just as well as I do—that the railwaymen's unions are led by, perhaps, the most intelligent set of trade union officials in this country, that they are reasonable men and that, over and above all, they have the confidence of all the members of their unions who have, on previous occasions, when a crisis of this character arose before, shown a full appreciation of the position when it was put before them. I have no doubt that if the present position were put to them in a proper way they would approach this matter also in a reasonable manner and would consult the members of their unions, but first of all the men must be satisfied of the nature of the causes which have brought this about. I think it will be acknowledged that, perhaps, no other section of the community can lay claim to a greater share of credit for their preparedness at certain times of political stress in this country to share the burden of the community from a national point of view and, as I say, while they will be prepared to make these sacrifices again, if they are necessary, just the same as any other section of the community, they will be prompted, very naturally, to ask on this occasion whether all the sacrifices to be borne are to be on the side of the railwaymen, engaged, as they are, in an industry which serves the interests of the community as a whole.
I suggest to the Minister, in view of the information that is available to me and to my colleagues, that the position arising out of the unhappy meeting yesterday at Kingsbridge, to which I have referred, has left a most embittered impression so far as the leaders are concerned, and before that situation gets worse I ask the Minister, in the interests of transport as a whole and, in particular, may I say, on this occasion, in the interests of the men concerned, to take this situation immediately under his control and away from that unhappy and embittered atmosphere, which surrounded yesterday's meeting, to which I have referred, and to which, I may say, so far as the trade union leaders are concerned, they are not prepared to return. I do urge the Minister to take that course and to take it promptly. If he does he will create that confidence which is necessary at the moment both among the working railway men and, may I say, amongst the general public.
I would like to supplement what has been said by the Lord Mayor. It would be necessary for the Minister to develop further what he said in regard to the proceedings yesterday. One of the things one would expect to hear from the Minister would be something along the lines the trade unions were inclined to look for yesterday from the manager of the company. We only ask now that it has been found necessary so drastically to curtail the railway services whether or not the cut is justified. When you are with people who have given their lives to the railway industry and were inclined to talk intelligently one would want to know the reason that brought about the cut. We are all aware that in the past years we have had as grave a crisis as we have to face now. And we know that the branch lines were kept going on turf and kept going very well. It may be that turf is no longer available to the railways for transport purposes but we ought to be told that. Turf and timber were quite competent to keep the short-distance branch lines running in the past crisis and they should be able to keep the branch lines going now. If, as is said by the Minister, they have foreseen this coming shortage of fuel there is a very poor reflection of that vision of theirs in the fact that the speed of trains has been maintained in recent times at pre-war speeds and inspectors have been going down the lines and chasing after the goods train drivers to see that they got the last inch and the last ounce out of the engines. The locomotive men who love their engines and know them like pet animals tell us if they had been given a longer time to make the run they could have saved, probably, 25 per cent. of the fuel. I, as one who was on the deputation that was present with the manager of the company, was at one with the other members in asking some of these reasonable questions and in asking the management to see whether it could make a reduction in the speed rather than the closing down of the branch lines and complete dislocation of the services. We approached this, not alone from the point of view of the men but from the point of view of the citizens generally.
We asked then and we are asking now what inquiries have been made by the Minister from the heads of the railway company to satisfy him that there is a need which justifies the drastic slashing of the railway services which is proposed and how is the shortage of fuel related to the reduction, of the services. We cannot speak of what the amounts are. The Minister must know what the reduction of fuel will amount to and what would be the relation between the reduction of the amount of fuel and the reduction of the services, ignoring the fact that we are no longer burning timber. We did burn timber very successfully during the crisis which we went through and since then we have learned to knit the dust together with pitch, and if my information is correct there is an abundance of pitch available at Inchicore that would be sufficient to tie up this stuff which could be used very effectively. There is a good store of it there. All these matters ought to be reasonably inquired into and some information given from reliable sources as to whether or not this reduction of the services 66? per cent. in the case of passenger traffic and 33? per cent. in the case of goods is necessary, and arises from lack of imported fuel, and if everything is being done as it should be done in order that the country would not be precipitated into this crisis. We are told we are going to have supplementary bus services. Is that a very happy augury or are we so sure that the petrol will be available? We are given to understand it is equally difficult to secure the petrol and now are we going to start replacing one service with another service that is equally dependent on outside fuel? If yesterday's proceedings are anything to go on there were 18 unions represented which were offering to give full co-operation to the railway company. They were making a very reasonable request that they should be told the magnitude of the crisis and asked that they should be given the proposals of the company in writing so that they could take them to their unions and all the unions could speak with one voice, and one union would not be bringing back a different version to another. The attitude of the manager was that he would put nothing in writing. If you have not the intelligence to understand our proposals you are getting nothing in writing. I can tell the House that that has created a feeling of great bitterness and resentment. The trade unions are already prepared to co-operate and I repeat the appeal of the Lord Mayor that the Minister would interest himself in the matter, before he drifts into a much more serious situation than only having two trains a week. Because it is quite possible that we will not have a one-day service if the strained relations continue as they have been following yesterday's meeting.
I would like to join with other Deputies in asking the Minister to take industrial users more into his confidence. It probably is correct to say that to expand the Minister's statement in the House would not be possible. But surely it should be possible through employers' organisations to inform coal users as to what the position is likely to be in the future. It is very difficult for an industrialist to reorganise his operations to a situation upon which he has no information whatsoever. All that we know is that, after a few days of this month, our supplies will stop and then after another few days there will be a review. We were told that we would get the full allowance for this month but, as for the future, until the Minister's statement to-night we had no indication whatever. Yet we had to dig into such little stocks as we had been allowed to get together and, in the case of one little plant of which I am aware, they had not sufficient fuel to start out next week. It does not seem to me to be fair of the Department to expect industrialists to co-operate as they are anxious to co-operate on a basis of that kind. The statement of the Minister is of some assistance, but I hope as soon as possibly may be he will give in confidence, if necessary, such further information as may enable them to organise their business according to the amount of fuel which may be available. I hope that in any future crises that may arise the Minister will feel that he can rely on full co-operation from industrialists and that he, in his turn, will co-operate with them in providing them with all necessary information.
In regard to the question of fuel there is one class of consumers whose case I should like to bring before the Minister, and that is hospitals. I am intimately connected with one particular hospital where the position is very serious. The hospital works on steam. It does not work on electricity, and the authorities there have had to close down the furnaces for several days in the week. That has meant that vegetables which were normally put in steam presses cannot be prepared. Cooking was carried on in heat storage cookers, but only one out of three is now working. It cannot take vegetables so that the whole system in that hospital has been very seriously disorganised. The laundry which it ran, as most hospitals do run their own laundries, has had to close down. The ordinary commercial laundries are not in a position to take on washing from hospitals. I would ask the Minister therefore specially to consider the position of hospitals and to state at the earliest possible moment what priority they are likely to be granted. I am sure that the Minister will not leave these hospitals in the position in which many of them find themselves now.
There is one other question to which I should like to refer. The Taoiseach some time ago referred to the use that commercial people in Dublin ought to make of the bogs and suggested that they should organise their own tarf production. That on the face of it is an excellent idea, but it seems to be almost impossible to arrange for such production. I would ask the Minister for Supplies to give commercial people more information on that subject. The crux of the situation seems to be that it is impossible to get local labour. I understand that Dublin in the main is expected to draw its turf supplies from remote western areas so that there is no question of any firm getting any assistance from, or making any use of, its own staff. I should like the Minister to deal with these two points particularly.
This Party, as Deputy McGilligan has pointed out, asked for a statement on this matter from the Government when the House met on Tuesday, and we have at last got that statement. We desired to secure that statement for the purpose of clarifying the position as we felt that the public are entitled to know what is the exact position. We felt that some people were very concerned about the situation and that if it were possible to allay their feelings in any way something should be done with that object. On the other hand, quite a large section of the community, we thought, failed to realise the extreme gravity of the situation that the country was facing, and it was well that a clear statement about the situation would be made here in the Dáil so that people would understand what they had to face in the future. I think that the seriousness of the situation has been brought home to us in a very pathetic way by the statement made here to-night by Deputy O'Sullivan, the Lord Mayor of Dublin. Certainly, one felt that the approach that has been made to the matter so far as certain individuals are concerned was not all that it should be. The Minister has tried to deny responsibility but certainly the spirit that one would expect in the situation that has to be faced was completely lacking in so far as that interview, so very vividly described by the Deputy, was concerned.
One thing I expected to hear from the Minister was what effect the present crisis was likely to have on production and employment generally. We heard no statement from the Minister in that respect. The Minister gave no information regarding the future so far as other essential supplies were concerned or whether there was any danger of any deterioration in these supplies. It appears to me that the Minister and the Government feel that they can rely on the steady inflow of whatever oil and kerosene supplies are available, because we appear to be switching over to buses and putting more buses on the road. I should like to point out to the Minister that in so far as food production is concerned, we are relying to a very great extent on kerosene and production from the tractor—I believe very much more than the average person in the country realises or appreciates. I heard it stated in the debate on the Vote for Agriculture that even if supplies of kerosene were to disappear, if a determined effort were made to organise our agricultural resources, we could still carry on. I do not think that people who talk in that strain fully realise our position. I want to say that even if we were to get into a situation like that, if kerosene were completely to disappear as fuel for power on the farm, if it were possible to save the harvest by turning out all the people in the cities and towns to work in the fields, we must still realise that 75 per cent. of our threshing operations are now done with kerosene and that the old steam engine to a very great extent has gone to the scrap heap and cannot be brought back. The wisdom of relying on future supplies of fuel of that sort and the wisdom of switching over to petrol is a matter calling for serious consideration because whatever imports in the way of petrol and kerosene are likely to arrive in future I understand will be on a tonnage basis, and if the amount of petrol and increased it can only be at the cost of kerosene. I should like the Minister definitely to bear that in mind and, if necessary, build up some stocks.
I think in this crisis also, and it is a matter we have adverted to time and time again, the economic aspect of the problem is far more important even than defence. The real danger that threatens this country is economic rather than military, and the wisdom of getting in big reserves of petrol and keeping iron rations of coal available for the Army is a matter that should concern this House and the Government. It might be wiser, in present circumstances, if military lorries and petrol supplies utilised by the Army were made available for production and transport generally. The Minister assured us that, while there would be a drastic reduction in passenger services, the freight trains would not be reduced to the same extent, but some reduction in the cattle-trade service would be necessary. The transport of live stock is a very serious matter. The Minister may not be aware of the situation which had developed before this crisis occured. The bottom had practically fallen out of the live-stock trade so far as store cattle were concerned. That was in anticipation of the second front. A number of cattle dealers were reluctant to purchase cattle in substantial numbers because they were of opinion that, the moment the second front opened, the whole rolling stock of Great Britain would be at the service of the Army and that, for a month, or six weeks, or, perhaps, two months, little or no rolling stock would be available for the transportation of store cattle. I am one of those who subscribe to that opinion. That has reacted on the price of store cattle.
I am informed that it is the intention of the railway company to provide a special train or trains for the big fairs but to reduce the number of wagons. Where 150 wagons were normally available, that number may be reduced to 100 or 80 wagons. That may have a disastrous effect on the live-stock trade and it may seriously affect the whole economy of the country. It may place farmers in a position in which they cannot cash their live-stock and, as a corollary, they may not be able to meet their obligations as regards rates and so forth. If a position of that kind were to develop, it would be very serious. So far as travelling facilities for cattle traders are concerned, if they find it difficult to get around from one fair to another and if the element of competition disappears, that will react unfavourably on the live-stock industry. I think that the Minister should seriously contemplate the attachment of a passenger coach to the special trains going to fairs. When wagons are being sent down from kingsbridge to the fair in the country, on the previous night or evening, a passenger coach should be attached to them so as to enable cattle dealers to travel from thecity to the fairs. If thee is any limitation on the number of wagons for individual dealers. I am merely calling the attention of the Ministr to the practical aspects of this whole proble and to the likely result of the limitation of the number of wagons available at fairs. I do not say that the Minister can eliminate all these evils but he should attempt to reduce them to the Minimum.
The Minister referred to the necessity for building up stock of fuel for the peak moths of September, October and November for the transportation of grain, truf and later, beet. That is very wise precuation. He assuered us that the company would be accumulating stock of coal for the sugar-beet campaign period. The four factrories operate very largely on anthracite. For that reason, the same amount of heat is not required as would be required for drying of pulp. The Minister has stated that it may be necessary to cut out the drying of pulp. Before the Minister made that statement, I thought that there was a possibility of that. If that be so, it will have very serious reactions on the agricultural industry and, particularly, on dairying. Pulp, in its wet, raw state will not stand storage for any length of time. In the beet areas, little or no roots are grown. The agricultural community there rely on the pulp which they get back from the beet delivered to the factories. This pulp is a very valuable product so fr as the feeding of live stock is concerned. If we are simply going to produce suger at the factories and throw the pulp out in the nearest field or bog, it would be far better if we did not grow beet at all. I put down a question to the Minister last week relating to that matter. If the sugar factories cannot operate effectively and send back this byproduct for live-stock purposes, it would be far better for us, as a community, drastically to cut our sugar consumption and permit the people normally engaged in the production of the raw material for sugar to produce some other feeding crop so as to maintain our live-stock industry. I. have referred to the necessity for utilising to the fullest extent whatever raw material is available for propulsion, particularly in respect of transport.
I think that quite a number of economies could be effected. There must be a tremendous switch-over and we must make better use of petrol and other fuels. Quite a lot of petrol is being used, even at present, fey Government inspectors for supervising work. Superintendents of the Gárda are operating their cars still. Coming down to some of the industries mentioned by the Minister, the bakers are still permitted to operate petrol-driven vans which are seriously overlapping all over the country. That is one matter in respect of which I think the people could service themselves by collecting their own bread. I do not know that it is wise to continue to operate bread-vans on petrol in the circumstances in which we find ourselves. Every economy that can be made in that direction ought to be made. Reference has been made to the production arid development of more coal here. One particular company was organised quite recently to derolop a coal deposit in Carlow. The Minister for Finance was questioned by Deputy McGilligan on that. The company had to face enormous difficulties and got little or no help from he Government or the Department. They were not looking for capital and lad the financial resources to carry in.
What facilities were hey refused ?
They got just a normal ation of petrol for the month and ere not able to get sufficient supplies of petrol to keep the engine going to pump our the water, which was hampering operations. Surely, the wisdom of providing a supply of petrol to keep ofwater out of the mines is obvious, if we are likely to get any coal out of the mines. The company has risked its own capital in the developement of a miue and looked for no State assistance, good, bad or indifferent. All they wanted was this petrol and one or two other things. Representations were made by the company, and by me personaly on its behalf, to the Department, but there seemed to be no sympathy whatever so far as the Department was concerned. In matters of that sort, surely every effort should be made, nothwithstanding the difficulties.
I fully appreciate the difficulties of rationing, to the various industries and to transport generally, the small supplies of petrol avilable. At the same time, in developing a mine that is to to productive of valuable coal and authractive, every effort should be made to provide the necessary supply of petrol to keep an engine going which is keeping the water pumped out. If there is failure to keep the water pumped up, that is the end of the effort and the mine must be shut down.
I hope the Minister will give some further information to the House as to what the position in rgard to kerosene and petrol supplies will be, particularly in regard to kerosene for food production. I assure the Minister and the Taoiseach that, if there is any failure in that respect, I would be afraid to contemplate the situation which will develop in this country.
I am sure the discussion to-night and the suggestions from different sides of the House will do a certain amount of good. There is one point which no Deputy has touched so far. We know well the cause of the shortage. We know that there is no use in blaming the railway company, which is doing its best; neither is there any use in blaming the Department of supplies. There is, however, one suggestion I would offer to the Minister. To certain extent, I do no think we in this country shoudl be terribly worried about the situation. When anything unusual at all crops up, there is often a tendency in this House to view it with alarm. I often ask myself if it does good to view such things with alarm.
The suggestion I put to the Minister is that he is in a very sound position. He could almost tell some people who are more or less responsible for our difficulties: "We are of a certain advantage to you." He is in a great position to hammer a good bargin. That is the line on which this could be appriached and that is the suggestion I make from this side of the House. There is no use in going bagging and there is no suggestion that we should do that. There is an element of worry, and people say there is need for us to beg. I want the Minister to take different view and to tell people that, if they place us in an awkward position by adopting a certain attitude tothis country, we may be able to make the position just as bad for them in another direction. If certain things that we need are curtailed unnecessarily from us by other people, we may ne able to curtail things that they need.
I know quite well that, as regard trying to save supplies of coal for the beet factories and also supplied of kerosene, suggesions have been forthcoming from all parts of the House and I expect the Minister will take them into consideration. I ask the Minister to take my suggestion seriously. As far as he is concerned, we in this country have a trump card left in our hands.
In regard to the point made by Deputy Hughes, regarding the carriage of passengers on trucks going out for cattle, perhaps the Minister would consider allowing hackney cars a mileage of 100 miles instead of the present 500 miles?
I think we may abolish that restriction altogether.
I would like to join with other speakers in telling the Ministr that there is considerable amount of anxiety and uneasiness amongst the citizens regarding the uncertain position in which we find ourselves, owing to the restrictions which have developed in the past few weeks. A good deal of that anxiety is due to the absence of a statement, such as we have had here this evening.
I think every member of this House fully appreciates the responsibility lying on the Minister and the Government and the great task they have in trying to carry on during the present emergency. The railway position, which has been reviewed here by Deputy 0'Sullivain and others, is a very serious one. I can quite appreciate the Minister's point of view, when he says that no member of the Government has direct responsibility; but surely when a crisis is threatened as at present, the responsibility must be on the Government and on the Minister to take action to try to prevent the position being worsened.
In the usual way, in regard to industrial disputes, the Minister does not act until both sides come together and ask for his intervention. The House could suggest to the Minister that, having regard to what took place last night, when representatives of the various trade unions were brought together and the position was outlined to them verbally, it is a very reasonable request that these proposals or suggestions should be put -to them in writing. It is usual in the case of a man getting notice and ought to be the case when a nimber of men are being restricted in the way suggested. I think a refusal would be very discourteous, having regard to the danger of precipitating a very serious position, which is now threatened. I suggest to the Minister that he ought to make some move to-morrow to have the position explained to the men affected, and, if possible, have some alternative put up to the present proposals. Can the Minister say if the milk supply to the City of Dublin will be affected by the restricted railway service?
The milk trains are not being changed.
If it appears that the Minister has said all that he thinks it is prudent to say in the exising situation and if Deputies have made such contributions as they thought could be helpful, inasmuch as the principle channel for information to the people of the country is the Press, would it not be wise for the Minister to summon the editors of the four principal dailes to a press conference with himself, to speak to them perfectly frankly and openly, seeking their co-operation in getting communicated to the people at large the position as it is and as it is necessary for them to understand it, in the confidence that the camaraderie of the Press in the special circumstances in which we find ourselves will be content to take a leaf from the four dailies in the knowledge that they enjoy the Minister's full confidence and understand what is best in the public interest to polish for the present in any case?
My reason for intervening in this debate is due to the fact that the Minister for Industry and Commerce made a statement which affects a town in which I am the chairman of the local public authority. He referred to the closing of the branch line between Portlaoghise-Mountmellick, and said that the existing bus service there was considered sufficient. I want to tell the Minister that there was never a bus service between these towns. I would like him to make the Deputies representing Laoighis-Offaly may understand what he means. My honest opinion is that the GReat Southern Railways Company have for some years past been conidering the closing down of a number of branch lines.
The Deputy should understand that this is a restricted motion dealing with a particular matter, and that he cannot go into the general question of railway management.
I did not refer to railway management, but wanted to a make a suggestion to the Minister. The pas- senger service between Portlaoighise-Mountmellick was never very good, but the service for the carriage of goods and live stock was exceptionally good. The times are difficult and the people there are prepared to bear their share of the difficulties. The request that I make on their behalf is for a goods train service in the district. I pointed out to the Minister before that this branch line was to be closed down some years ago. I am of opinion that the railway company are just taking advantage of the emergency to dispense with the services of a number of their employees. They are using the fuel situation as a cloak for that purpose. At Question Time to-day the Minister was not prepared to disclose to the House, or to me, the amount of Irish coal that is being used by the railway company concerned. I wonder would the Minister be prepared to give the information to a Deputy in confidence. If he were, the Deputy might be able to get information for the Minister which would be helpful to him in the discharge of his duties as Minister — information that might throw some light on the rail services in many cases.
Some of these branch railway lines run through bogs. Surely it should be possible to operate a train service with fuel from the bog. About 18 months ago the passenger train service between Portlaoighise-Mountmellick was run on turf and timber. The company concerned is using the weapon to-day that there is no coal, and that, therefore, they cannot provide a train service. I am of opinion that they could by using fuel from the bogs. The plea of no coal should not be accepted for the closing down of the branch line that I am interested in. If it is a question of providing fuel locally for the maintenance of a rail service, then we will see that it is provided. Therefore, the company should leave us at least two or three trains a week. What excuse can they have for not doing so if we provide the fuel? I think that the Minister should make strong representations to the company to maintain rail services in areas where turf fuel is available. The Minister is familiar with the conditions that prevail in Mountmellick. Some two years ago he showed a sympathetic consideration for that town in view of the fact that an important local industry was being closed down. We have a bacon factory there that will be seriously affected by this proposal, and also, of course, the employees. The train from Portlaoighise to Mountmellick runs through the centre of a bog. It would be a strange thing if there was not enough fuel there to maintain a train service.
The Minister appealed to Deputies to help in the fuel drive. We all realise the necessity for the production of more turf. Would the Minister make representations to his colleague, the Minister for Local Government, especially where the work is being carried out by the county councils, to see that the conditions in the bogs are improved and that those employed on turf production get a decent living wage?
We are not discussing the wages of workers now.
The wages paid have a very grave effect on turf production. I might also mention that the area I come from is one of the best beet-growing districts in the country. How is the beet going to be handled if there is no railway service? The buses could not take it, or deal with the traffic from the bacon factory either. We want a goods train service between Portlaoighise and Mountmellick to get in goods for the traders of the town. We are not concerned at all about the passenger service. From the information at my disposal, which I shall disclose at a later date, I am satisfied that the company concerned are only using this emergency as a means for closing down the branch lines, which will never be reopened, and of getting rid of their employees.
In the middle of Deputy Flanagan's peroration he did suggest one thing of value, and that was that if it is possible at any time, where branch lines have been closed down, to restore at least a skeleton service, that should be done. Everybody knows that on those branch lines, to a great extent, the passenger service had more or less died out. I am speaking now of normal times, when people did not bother very much about the branch lines because they had other facilities from the point of view of being conveyed from place to place. But certainly a great amount of the goods traffic was carried over those branch lines and, if it is at all possible, the Minister should use his influence with the railways company to see that those branch lines are kept going for the transport of goods.
As regards one or two of the branch lines he mentioned, I would like him to give more details with regard to the diversion of bus services he mentioned. If he indicated the intentions of the railways company with reference to the diversion of bus services, he would allay a lot of uneasiness. In one case, if the buses have to be diverted to meet the existing situation, the nearest bus would be 14 miles away, and that would be the Cork-Limerick bus. That must mean the opening of a new service. The other service any way near the Banteer-Newmarket line is the Cork-Killarney bus. I am merely suggesting that the details of the proposed services should be given.
I was tempted to intervene when the Minister made an interjection during Deputy M. O'Sullivan's speech. The Minister suggested that he had no responsibility in the matter to which Deputy O'Sullivan referred. Having no information about the position of the railways company or their dealings with the trade unions I must say that the case made by Deputy O'Sullivan seemed very reasonable. It was presented in a very earnest manner and it impressed me. Whether the Minister has or has not responsibility, it is perfectly obvious the request made to him by Deputy O'Sullivan, to take on himself immediately the responsibility of dealing with that matter, was a very reasonable one and the Minister should accede to it. I could see underlying Deputy O'Sullivan's speech his fear that things might develop in a rather serious manner. Even if the Minister has no legal responsibility, he has at least this responsibility, that anything that will in the slightest way embarrass the transport situation and that could be avoided by action on his part, should be so avoided. He should without any further delay take such action.
Deputy Hughes referred to the possibility of utilising our petrol in a better manner. He referred to bread vans and I suggest that where such vans are allowed for essential services, it is utterly ridiculous to have them travelling 40 or 50 miles from a town or city to supply bread in an area where already there are bakeries quite capable of supplying that particular area. I suggest that the areas in which those vans operate should be restricted. A particular area should be supplied with bread from particular towns and villages. A bread van ought not to be allowed to travel 40 or 50 miles to a district, where possibly it would meet another bread van which had travelled the same distance from another direction.
I have one case in mind where such a ridiculous position exists. A contract was entered into by a local authority for the supply of bread to a hospital. That bread came from a bakery 18 miles away. The van travelled there twice a week. I suggest there was a waste of petrol in that case, with a van travelling 36 miles twice a week to bring bread that could easily be supplied locally. Local authorities ought to be compelled to get their bread supplies in an area where they could be brought by a boy on a bicycle.
On the question of the development of our native coal resources, the Minister is not very optimistic. Apparently the fact that he has not sufficient skilled labour is one of the reasons for not having increased production. I do not think the Minister is quite honest in his dealings over our native coal resources. Five years ago the Minister for Industry and Commerce was asked in the House to examine the possibilities of the North Cork and Limerick coalfields. Apparently a survey had been made some years ago. The reply I got from the Department was that their experts had investigated the position and they were satisfied that it was not a practical proposition to attempt to reopen those mines. Deputy Anthony and, I am sure, Deputy Looney, know the mines to which I am referring. They are old shafts.
It may have been perfectly true that it was not a practical proposition to reopen them, but an extraordinary thing happened. A local friendly and provident society was formed between the county council elections of 1942 and the General Election of 1943 and very great interest was taken in the mines by the local Fianna Fáil Deputy, who is now an ex-Deputy. Before the 1943 General Election a sum of £200 was given for the purpose of prospecting down there, and the company was allowed to dig up fields and make things like drains along them. That was not worth doing six years ago, but apparently it was worth doing last year. The Department may since have discovered that there was some value in the coalfields. I should like to know did the spending of the £200 indicate to them that there is a possibility of doing anything there?
As regards labour, there may not be much skilled labour, but the material is there to be trained. There are some middle-aged men there who have experience of working mines, because they went to England and Wales in the last war and worked in mines there and they can be regarded as trained men. I do not know if there is a possibility of getting coal out of that area, but I am aware that the local people are finding the outcrops very useful. The type of stuff they can get can be made very useful. I had some of it dug out myself and I may say that for household purposes it is a very satisfactory type of fuel to use. It makes a very good fire. I do not want to sound unduly optimistic, and I do not want to encourage the Minister to be too optimistic about it.
Deputies who are members of a Cork local authority will have to admit that the Cork County Council have had to close down work on bogs because they cannot get labour. There are two reasons. One is that there is a scarcity of farm and turf labour. The other is that the local authority is not able to compete in the matter of wages with the private producer. What have the local authorities to contend with this year? A sleansman will get from a private producer 12/- a day, his food and a pint—if I might put it that way.
And cigarettes.
And cigarettes. The wages paid by the local authority cannot compete against that.
Is that for piece work?
No, by the day. The local authority cannot compete and it means that the most skilled sleansman will go to work for the farmers, people in towns or the owners of lorries who have gone into the private end of turf production. The county council are in the position that they will find themselves without the best skilled men and there will be a great falling off, to my mind, in the production of turf by the local authorities in County Cork.
I also think that the Taoiseach, on the information he received during his visit to Killarney in connection with the more food and more fuel meeting some time ago, must be satisfied that the deputy surveyors in Kerry are of the same opinion, that for the same reasons they will not be able to produce in Kerry the amount of turf they are expected to produce by the State. That is one great difficulty. I have examined it very closely for the past month and I am satisfied that one of the most serious situations we are faced with, apart from the question of coal, is a danger of a great shortage of turf in the coming season. We are not expanding our turf production for these reasons, and I think the Minister ought not to be optimistic and ought to take every possible step to encourage the production of turf. It looks to be a great year for turf, so far as the weather is concerned, but the season is getting later and later, and I am sure that Deputies and the local authorities in Cork can bear me out in what I say.
I suggest to Deputies like Deputy Flanagan that there is not an area in this country or a Deputy who could not make a case for a particular district that some type of production would give them a special claim in connection with transport facilities. Deputy Donnellan could argue for Galway on beet as well as Deputy Flanagan can for Mountmellick. I could argue on other items. It is obvious that, if we are to deal with this thing from a broad point of view, there is no good in looking for special facilities for certain districts, because it cannot be done. It will be up to the Minister, as he suggested, to see that production in industry is divided. To my mind, it might not be a bad idea if production in agriculture were divided up into areas so that the growing of wheat next year, if the emergency lasts so long, should be concentrated in the areas where the land is rich and could produce wheat and the farmers in these areas compelled to grow all the wheat possible.
I would also, in conclusion, say to the Minister that I assume he has not any more information to give than he gave us originally. But I put this point to the Minister, and I think every Deputy will agree with me that this is our difficulty. People will ask us to-morrow or the day after: "Why is there this curtailment of the services?" Our answer to that will be: "You have seen the Minister's explanation and that is all we know." We will then be asked: "If such-and-such was the position two months ago, what is the position to-day?" Am I entitled to say that the Minister would prefer, and that it is in the public interest at the moment, not to give detailed figures of imports or of production or anything else like that; that I would be justified in saying that the Minister felt he would not be justified in giving detailed figures of imports? If that is the position, that satisfies me, but the difficulty we will be in allaying public uneasiness is that people will expect us to know all the details even though the Minister may be entitled to withhold them. I am satisfied with what the Minister says, that he has no more information to give. But I should like to get from him the statement that he would prefer not to go into details and figures of the real position as it would appear, say, for three months.
Mr. Larkin
I am one who sat in at this conference yesterday, and it may surprise Deputy Linehan to know that the company have taken upon themselves not only to antagonise the workers on the system, but deliberately to invite industrial war in this country. I stood there yesterday when a non-citizen, the manager of the Great Southern Railways Company, and an assistant manager definitely stated that they were taking this course because they were instructed to do so by the Government, which is the truth.
I do not believe any such statement was made.
Mr. Larkin
Of course, I could say the same thing to you.
There were other people present at the conference.
Mr. Larkin
There were 47 delegates. I can bring these 47 delegates to any committee of inquiry to prove that what you state is untrue. However, we were invited to talk over this.
The Deputy is aware, of course, that it is not in keeping with the rules of the House to charge any Deputy or Minister with stating an untruth.
Mr. Larkin
He said what I said was an untruth and, when he says that, I say that he is speaking an untruth.
The Minister has no more right than a Deputy in that matter.
Mr. Larkin
Of course, he has the right to ruin this country, if we are to judge by the way he is dealing with this question during this crisis. Even last night at a late hour I came to him to ask him to see if he could not conciliate the two sides. Is that true or not? But let us go back. We were invited there by a verbal and also by a written message to go and meet the manager. Who was the manager we met? The works manager. But the man behind the scenes, where was he? Where was this gentleman who has manipulated the transport arrangements of this country with a view to stock exchange speculation? He was not available. Anyway the man we met was the technical man with whom for 30 years we have had good relations. He made a statement, but he did not think he should be asked the question: "Will you put your statement in writing so that we, as representing the unions, can go back to our members and explain the matter." We argued for three hours with him. I ask Deputies was that a reasonable submission, that instead of having an oral statement from a man who was speaking about a matter dealing with the life of this country industrially and commercially we should ask the man that question? Surely it was a right and proper question, because we wanted to go to our own men, either in mass meeting or local meeting or in group meeting or individually, and explain the need for the change. We could not get anything after several hours' deliberation, only a verbal statement. We asked him to retire while we went into a huddle.
We chose a man to speak for us who represents one of the most important sections of industry in this country— Mr. O'Farrell—and, to my surprise, instead of being treated as a representative man he was treated almost as if he were of no account. Everybody knows that Mr. O'Farrell has a different temperament from mine— altogether different. But even Mr. O'Farrell was roused by the way he was treated. Surely a man representing a great company, with some 11,000 employees, has a right to approach a question like that in a decent and courteous manner. The lie was given, the same as the Minister gave to me to-night, to a man who was speaking authoritatively. He only said: "We would be glad if you would reduce to writing the submission of your company; we will take it back with promptitude and will bring you an answer as soon as possible as to how far we can associate ourselves with you in this crisis." But no, we were to agree to break down conditions that have been recognised for a long time without going out and discussing the matter. We were to give an undertaking to go to the unions, to men who have got responsible positions, and say: "Your conditions are no longer to be your conditions of to-day; you will have to do as we tell you."
We spoke to that gentleman kindly, knowing him intimately as we did. But, all the time, he had another gentleman beside him who was telling him what to say. I thought the matter was very serious, knowing how difficult it is to achieve anything when a certain attitude is taken by people, as it is hard to control them. Therefore, in the interests of the company, I came here late last night, and went up to the Ministerial Bench and asked the Minister would he use his good offices to bring both parties together immediately. Since that time I have been trying to adjust myself to certain happenings which are taking place every hour. We were told that there is a 25 per cent. reduction in fuel supplies— not coal supplies, because coal is a variable quantity. We asked was it a matter of bituminous coal; was it a question of slush, a question of timber or a question of turf. We had a practical driver there to give to Mr. Bredon, the manager, the details of running from one point to another, the amount of steam necessary and the amount of fuel required. We had the men who run the railways before him and we asked why, if there was a decrease of 25 per cent. in supplies of fuel, the services for passengers were being reduced by 66 per cent. and, for freight, by 33? per cent. We asked what was the logic of that and what they wanted of us. We were told: "We want you to give up the guaranteed week; we want the conciliation grades to go upon four days and we want the shopmen to go upon four and a half days. We also want you to give up your bonus." Is that not a nice proposition for 17,000 men to face? And when we come and ask the Government to take an immediate stand so as to help us to adjust our relations with this company, we are met with the statement that we are liars, but there is a place to which we can take this matter where we will not be told we are lying, but where everybody will be behind us and say that what we state is the truth. It is time the truth was told.
With regard to fuel supplies, I was foolish enough to write recently to the Minister about a hold-up on the canal. I notice in the official records that the Minister, in reply to a question, said that 29 Government barges had been constructed, the average cost of which was £1,042 and that 13 barges were not at the moment in use. I merely say that I will take anybody up to the Grand Canal at James's Street Harbour and, if there are not 17 boats tied up there, I will eat the boats. I told the Minister the exact position, that boats go down to Turraun with a captain and crew of two, spending 14 days on the passage and the captain gets £4 10s. 0d. while the Grand Canal Company gets £6 5s. 0d. in tolls for the trip. The locks have to be opened 14 times. The man who delivers the cargo, who works from 5 o'clock in the morning until late at night for the whole of the ten days, with three days' lying up and a day turning around and making for Turraun again, gets £4 10s. 0d. as against the £6 odd which this kindly, generous company, this philanthropic concern, gets. Worse than that, the man who does three trips from Carbury in County Kildare, a 30-mile journey by water, gets £4 10s. 0d. as captain, the other man getting £3 per week for working a 16-hour day, while the Grand Canal Company gets £18 in tolls.
That seems to be outside the motion.
Mr. Larkin
Surely it deals with the question of transport?
Quite. But the question before the House is not transport generally but the situation which has arisen owing to the stoppage or curtailment of coal deliveries.
Mr. Larkin
It should be fuel and not coal.
The motion I got refers to coal.
Mr. Larkin
Suppose I put it to you, Sir, that turf is coal in another form? As a matter of fact, a gentleman the other day said that he can make fuel by pressure out of any vegetable matter.
Turf is not coal though it might become coal under certain conditions.
Mr. Larkin
Let me come to the matter of coal. I say that the landings of coal in the past month are normal and I challenge contradiction of that statement. I believe, however, that they could be above normal, if only we had a sense of our responsibilities. I suggest that the Minister should take some of the important men in the trade into consultation—men in Fuel Importers, Limited, such as Carroll, Mackenzie or some of the others—and ask them what can be done, outside the ordinary Government activity, to get certain supplies of coal. I know that two years ago during a crisis coal was available in Scottish ports almost free for shipment, no permit being required, but no bottoms could be got. In other words, no steamers or sailing ships could be got, but they could have been got if only——
That is a detail of administration of two years ago and has already been debated.
Mr. Larkin
I am speaking of the immediate past. I say that the landings of the past week have been normal, and I challenge contradiction by anybody—civil servant, executive, or anybody else. I further say that, if that is true, then there must also be a certain amount of coal in reserve in certain places which can be got at. It may not be available in large quantities. Six thousand tons of fuel per week are required to keep the Great Southern Railways working, and, if as stated by officials of the Government, two tons of turf are equal to one ton of coal, which is not true, as a greater quantity of turf is required, it means that 8,000 tons in all are required under the present arrangement. I say that there are 6,000 tons of pressed fuel in Dublin, which is a good fuel for firing and getting up steam, which could be released. It is lying now in reserve. There is also bituminous coal in this city, to the extent of at least 1,000 tons and there is slush, which can be made into ovoids, to the amount of 2,800 tons. There is also the fact, which cannot be disputed, that turf and timber could be used on the railway branch lines to fire the boilers, and that the speed of the trains could be slowed down to 30 or 25 miles an hour, a speed which does not require the same power as a speed of 50 or 60 miles an hour. It might involve a longer time in getting to Cork, which sometimes might be a blessing, or longer to get to Dublin.
Which might be a greater blessing.
Mr. Larkin
A journey of six hours, instead of four hours, would not make very much difference. I say there is sufficient fuel at present to keep working normally and, in the meantime, we could look at what our reserves are.
I do not suppose the Chair will challenge me when I say that coke might be classified as coal. I suggested the other day that there was available open-hearth coke, from which gas can be made. I suggest that that be taken over, and in return for handling over that coke, we get the ordinary coke from the present system of gas production. Gas cannot be made out of the coke produced in the gas works, but it can be produced from open-hearth coke, and I suggest that that coke be taken under control. It merely means the exchange of a white dog for a black monkey but, as a result, we have more gas. I was glad to hear the Minister say he proposed to put his foot down and to stop black-marketing in the supply of gas. It should have been done at least four years ago. With regard to the train services, I suggest to the Minister that the open and determined attempt on the part of the Great Southern Railways management to disrupt the services of the railways by a challenge to the men who run the railways is a matter to which the Government should put a stop at once.
Why not, as an emergency measure, take over the Great Southern Railways Company and, in fact, all the transport services in the Twenty-Six Counties? Some time, I suppose, we will be able to take over these services for the 32 Counties, but, in the meantime, we have Twenty-Six Counties, so why not let the Government take over these utility undertakings, such as gas, railways, general transport, and so on? I can assure the Government that there are plenty of men who will do the work well when they know they are working for the nation, but if they feel that they are only working for grafters, speculators and profiteers, they will demand their pound of flesh.
My friend on the left here referred to fuel, but what has happened? An advertisement appeared in the newspapers a few days ago asking for skilled labour to win turf. Of course, a sleansman might be called a skilled worker, or men engaged in a particular type of work on the bog, but surely in the case of a barrow-man, any ordinary labourer could do that work. The point is that you have something like 20,000 able-bodied men in Dublin looking for work, and yet you have an advertisement inserted in the papers asking men to come up from Mayo to cut turf on the banks at Glencree. I spoke to some of these men and asked them why they came up here to do work that could be done by plenty of men who are now unemployed in Dublin, as I was informed that there was plenty of work down there in their own county for these men.
The Deputy has again got away from the motion.
Mr. Larkin
In what way, Sir? Surely, I heard a reference being made to turf by other speakers. If you rule that turf is not a fuel, then all right, but I think it is outrageous to bring into an area, where there are idle men and idle spades and barrows, men who have left behind in their own area barrows and spades, and who could find work there.
Possibly; but that is not a matter that comes under this motion.
Mr. Larkin
Surely, it is a matter for the emergency.
That is not relevant to this motion.
Are not the arrangements that are to be made to meet the situation brought about by the lack of fuel imports a matter for the emergency?
Is it a matter of "grave and urgent national importance"?
Surely, yes.
Mr. Larkin
If these men were to go back to Mayo it may be suggested that they will be occupying seats on the trains which might be required for other people, but the fact is that they are occupying seats on the buses in Dublin every day to within two miles of the bog-face. I do not want to see these men walking the roads of their own county, but there is work for them to do there. What is the reason for bringing them up here when we have so many idle men ourselves? Sleansmen are offered £3 a week, and barrow-men £2 a week. Let the Government offer sleansmen £3 a week and barrow-men £2 a week for working in their own area, and then we will go out in Dublin and cut our own turf. We want to organise this matter in our own way in the interests of the city. I say that these matters to which I have applied myself are matters of deep concern not only to the members of this House but to the people of the Twenty-Six Counties, and if there is going to be a crisis, then let us all face up to it.
The Minister for Justice spoke last night of the magnificent rally of the L.S.F. and other such organisations, and said that they were a credit to the nation and had done all that was needed. Is it to be thought that the citizens of this country, in general, will not be willing and glad to do all that they can in this emergency? There are three ships laid up in Dun Laoghaire Harbour because of the stupidity of certain individuals who get up and say that they will do what they like with their own ships—our ships—and yet we have men stating here that this is a democracy and that they are giving full and ample awards to the men who go down to the sea in ships. Why be such hypocrites? These men are faced with as many dangers and as great hardships as any other seamen are faced with, and yet, when they ask for the right to live, some pettifogging gentleman says: "No, you will have to do what we say; these are our ships and we will do what we like with them."
Could the Deputy relate that matter to the motion under discussion?
Mr. Larkin
I think that the matter before the House is coal. Practically no ship goes to sea without coal.
The Deputy is not in order.
Mr. Larkin
I suggest that if coal is the subject of debate, and if you are putting coal into the bunkers in ships that go to sea, it would be better used on trains if we cannot import any coal. However, Sir, if you rule against it, well and good.
Yet the Deputy repeats it.
Mr. Larkin
Very well, Sir. I think that it is a matter that can be best discussed in another place.
I do not want to intervene very much in this debate, but I have been requested by clergymen and other citizens in the Ballaghaderreen area, and other people interested in the County Roscommon area, to see if anything could be done to prevent the closing down of the Ballaghaderreen-Kilfree line. The people there fully realise the seriousness of the present position. They realise that it is impossible for the Minister and the company concerned to meet each and every demand that is made on them and, in view of the serious situation resulting from the shortage of coal, we should be slow to ask them to do something unreasonable. We say, on our part, that we will make every effort to secure sufficient turf in the district, and we will give the railway company an assurance that sufficient turf will be produced and made available locally for at least a limited service. I think everybody will realise the serious situation that would result from the closing down of this line. Ballaghaderreen has been noted for its very fine fairs and for its very fine business, and while I might admit that the passenger traffic there has not been a paying proposition for some years, I think that, undoubtedly, the amount of goods traffic going into Ballaghaderreen has been a very big asset to the railway company as long as I can remember.
Another aspect of the matter that I should like to deal with is the loss of employment that would be caused to a number of railway officials if this line is closed down. A great many of these people have taken up residences there with their families, and it would be a great hardship on them if there should be any change. A great many aspects of the situation have already been dealt with and I do not wish to delay the House further than to urge as strongly as I can upon the Minister the desirability of keeping even a partial service on this line. I can assure the Minister and the railway company that the traders of Ballaghaderreen and the farmers surrounding it will do everything possible to secure that sufficient turf is provided for the purpose.
One point to which nobody has adverted in the course of the discussion is the question of priorities in connection with passenger traffic. I am sure that numerous Deputies have been approached by people who want to know what possibility there is of securing priority and whether certain kinds of business will get priority. I think the Minister ought to make an authoritative statement on that matter. It may be that the company have not yet decided what classes of people are to receive priority in travelling by bus or train, or in what order priority is to be given, but the situation at the moment is that whoever books first gets first preference. It could happen that numerous selfish people, if they might be so described, who would be going on holidays or travelling for amusement, might be able to get accommodation while, at the same time, a large number of people who found it necessary to travel on essential business could not secure travelling facilities. It is hardly necessary to enumerate the various classes for whom accommodation should be provided, but I am sure the Minister appreciates that certain sections should receive first consideration. I do not know what system the railway company is going to adopt and this is hardly the place to deal with the matter in detail as one suggestion might be as good as another. At the present time, however, numerous people are in a state of frustration of mind as to the situation. The Minister admitted yesterday that if a man travels from one portion of the country next week there is no guarantee that he will be able to get back at the time he wants. It may be that the grave situation existing at present precludes any definite assurance being given in the matter, but it should be possible for people who have to travel on essential business to get back again when that business is concluded, otherwise serious dislocations of one kind or another may arise.
In regard to the statements on the railway situation which we have heard here tonight, accepting what Deputy O'Sullivan has said and accepting, on the other hand, the Minister's reply, it is manifest to everyone that if a situation is developing or is likely to develop in which there will be acute disagreement and a certain amount of passion aroused between the workers and the management of the railway company, the result for the general community will be unfortunate. I am sure the company and employees must realise that they are only a section of the community, that this is a national problem and that the sooner it is settled in an amicable fashion the better it will be for themselves and the country.
Debate adjourned.