Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 17 Apr 1947

Vol. 105 No. 6

Committee on Finance. - Vote 65—Industry and Commerce.

Minister for Industry and Commerce (Mr. Lemass)

I move:—

That a sum not exceeding £3,281,670 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending the 31st day of March, 1948, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Industry and Commerce, including certain Services administered by that Office and payment of certain Subsidies and sundry Grants-in-Aid.

The details of the Department's organisation are indicated in the Book of Estimates and also the various purposes for which the money is being voted. I do not propose to deal with matters of detail, except in one or two respects, but I will, of course, be glad to give any information which Deputies may require, when replying. The greater part of my remarks at this stage will be confined to a general review of matters affecting the position of industry and commerce. On many occasions during the past few years, I expressed the view that the present time, this period of two or three years after the termination of the war, would be of critical importance in our future industrial development. That view was based on the belief that, as soon as possible after the end of the war, we should make a maximum effort to increase industrial activity as rapidly as the improvement of conditions in international trade facilitated the supply of materials and equipment, not only for the purpose of arresting and reversing the flow of emigration by offering wider opportunities of employment in this country, and to offset the inflationary effect of higher money incomes by expanding the supply of consumer goods by our own efforts, but also because the immediate post-war years would, I believed, give exceptional scope and opportunity for expansion both in supplying the increased demands for goods and in availing of world-wide scarcities to establish ourselves in international trade, an opportunity which might not recur and which, if not availed of, might be permanently lost.

I confess that I contemplated then that, while the improvement in general world conditions and in the availability of essential supplies from abroad might be slower than some people hoped and expected, it would nevertheless be regular and continuous. I did not anticipate that any combination of causes, apart from renewed hostilities, would operate to make many supply problems more difficult this year than in any of the war years, or would have the effect of postponing to the third year after the war various plans which had been discussed and made for the expansion of industry, the renovation and modernisation of industrial plants, the reorganisation of transport, the enlargement of power production and other steps necessary to national development.

It is clear now that the recovery in industrial output and employment which was recorded last year, and which we hoped was merely a foretaste of much greater development in this and subsequent years, has been checked by the new difficulties which have since emerged, particularly as regards coal, and that the delivery of new plant and equipment from abroad and an increased inflow of raw materials will be much slower of realisation than we had anticipated. 1947 will not be the decisive year in our industrial development that we hoped. We must now envisage a longer period before we shall be completely masters of our own rate of progress. While that is, for many reasons, disappointing, it is not altogether without its advantages, as the planning and direction of our development can proceed with somewhat clearer knowledge as to probable future world conditions and also with the benefit of the growing realisation amongst us of what is required of every section concerned with industry if our progress is to be adequate and sound. Deputies will have noted, I am sure, the significance of our external trade statistics for 1946.

General Mulcahy

We have not seen them yet.

Mr. Lemass

The detailed figures for 11 months have been published. The detailed figures for the 12 months will be forthcoming shortly. Over the twelvemonth period, the total value of our imports was £71,834,000. The value of our exports was £38,756,000. The gap between them was £33,078,000. It is doubtful if the favourable balance of so-called invisible items in 1946— that is to say, the net revenue from investments, remittances from Irish people resident abroad, tourist expenditure and payments for various services—was adequate to bridge the gap. In 1945, the most recent year for which an estimate was made, the credit balance on invisible trade was assumed to be £29,372,000. Unless 1946 showed a substantially larger balance, it would seem that, last year, our imports may have been financed to some extent by drawing on balances accumulated earlier.

It is, I think, obvious that the volume of imports would have been very much greater but for the export controls maintained by other Governments. The 1946 import figures were not inflated by any exceptional purchases of capital equipment or by any significant restocking process. It is, in fact, probable that, in 1947 and subsequent years, the gap between imports and exports will widen, because, while additional imports are urgently required and may become possible, the prospects of an earlier expansion of exports in equal measure are not so good.

The seriousness of this situation will be obvious. It is true that, during the war years, the nominal value of the external assets owned by Irish financial institutions and Irish residents appreciated considerably. It is, however, very questionable whether that increase of nominal value was more than enough, if enough, to offset the depreciation in the buying power of sterling. Most of our external assets are sterling assets. In any event, we cannot contemplate with equanimity the prospect of a continuing deficit in our international trading account, necessitating the financing of purchases abroad out of capital. That is a process which must, in the course of time, force us to reduce our standards of living—either to consume less of our own production so as to increase the surplus available for export or to do without supplies of imported goods which we may desire but may not have the wherewithal to purchase. It will be noted that our trade with Great Britain very nearly balanced. Our produce consigned to that country and the six north-eastern counties of Ireland was valued at £35,779,000. Our imports of goods of British and SixCounty origin were valued at £37,398,000. The remainder of our total imports—that is to say, imports from countries other than Great Britain—were valued at £34,436,000, against which we consigned to such countries goods worth only £2,977,000, some part of which, in 1946, was represented by goods exported free under the European relief programme.

The purchase of goods other than those of British origin was made possible, in the main, by the provision of dollars from the sterling area dollar pool. According to current proposals, this pool will come to an end in July next from which time sterling arising from current transactions should be freely convertible into other currencies. Study of our trade statistics will, however, create doubt as to whether the total volume of convertible sterling available to us will be adequate to cover purchases outside the sterling area in circumstances in which nonmonetary factors at present limiting supplies will not be operating. Should that position arise, it would create problems of a substantial kind, affecting not merely the adequacy of our supplies of consumer goods but also our capacity to carry through plans for major economic development which require heavy payments abroad for necessary equipment. During the war years, many Deputies questioned the wisdom of continuing various exports to Great Britain, on the ground that payment was made in the form of sterling credits which could not be utilised to satisfy the urgent current needs for imports. Whatever validity may have been in that argument in the past, it is clear that it no longer exists. The bulk of our exports will continue to go to Britain and will be paid for in sterling. Their total value will not exceed the value of British goods which we will import. On the termination of the sterling area dollar pool, our only possible source of dollars and other non-sterling currencies will be the sterling accruing from current transactions, including exports to Great Britain, and it seems that, on the basis of 1946 exports related to 1946 imports, which, as I have said, were altogether inadequate to meet the prevailing needs, the sterling accruing from current transactions may not be sufficient——

General Mulcahy

I thought I under-stood the Minister to say that it was unlikely that our exports to Great Britain in future would be greater than our imports from Great Britain.

Mr. Lemass

I put it this way: In the immediate future, there is much more likelihood of a substantial expansion of imports than of exports.

Mr. Norton

Does the Minister say that we cannot use our existing sterling assets in Britain to finance purchases abroad when the dollar pool ends?

Mr. Lemass

The British Government undertook under the Washington Loan Agreement to make sterling arising from current transactions freely convertible from July.

Mr. Norton

The sterling assets already there cannot be used to make purchases abroad?

Mr. Lemass

The British Government have not entered into any international obligation to make them convertible.

Mr. Norton

There is no certainty that we can use the sterling assets already there because this agreement refers to the use of current sterling?

Mr. Lemass

That is so. The first and most important factor in our economic position——

General Mulcahy

I do not like the Minister to leave the impression that there have been completed discussions as to the availability of our external assets for use abroad.

Mr. Lemass

No discussions have taken place on the matter yet. I am basing my statement upon facts which are publicly known.

General Mulcahy

We do not accept that sterling assets which were accumulated during the war can be tied up, either in whole or in part, in any way.

Mr. Lemass

We have, of course, to have regard to the facts of the situation.

Mr. Norton

That is the fact, that the other fellow has our money.

Mr. Lemass

If it should prove to be correct that our visible exports, plus the credit balance on invisible items, are insufficient to pay for all the goods we need to import, and we are not to deplete our external assets, convertible or not, or incur a burden of foreign debt maintaining higher consumption standards now at the expense of lowering the standard of living in the future, we can meet that situation by a combination of very few methods.

It can be met, first, by increasing our exports, which, if it is not to mean depriving ourselves of goods which we need, means a substantial increase in output; second, by avoiding the import of goods if we can make them quite well for ourselves, and, thirdly, by doing without some part of the foreign goods that we need. Deputies will have noted from recent Press reports the action taken by the Government of Sweden in somewhat similar circumstances. It is in the light of that situation that we must consider our present economic position and form our policy.

Obviously, the most satisfactory solution of our problem is to effect such a substantial expansion of our production that our need for imports will be reduced and our exportable surplus increased. An expansion of output on the scale required is not now possible, nor will it become possible until we have overcome current shortages of fuel and power and expanded our productive capacity in industry and in agriculture far beyond what it now is. Not merely must we effect a substantial expansion of productive capacity, but we must achieve such improvements in the efficiency of productive methods as to ensure that the goods available for export can be sold without subsidy at a cost which will induce others to buy them. That is the essence of the problem. The need not only for increased production but for efficient low-cost production must determine the details of policy, particularly in industry, where it will be the decisive factor in settling all the questions which arise from time to time concerning the nature, size and location of industrial units, the manufacturing processes employed, distribution arrangements and the productivity and cost of labour.

We cannot have everything we want in this world. If we want to make sure of a reasonable and improving standard of living, a widening field of employment and the development of a workable economic system, we must not merely make the effort necessary to step up production but we must also do so on a basis that will keep the level of prices here in line with the prices elsewhere and increase our exportable surplus of goods in a manner that will give a fair prospect of holding our place in competitive international markets.

In present circumstances, with insufficient fuel, power, transport, equipment and materials, it may seem to be unduly optimistic to be speaking of expanding production on a basis of competition with countries which have not those disadvantages in equal measure, but unless we are to give up in despair and wait for disaster to overtake us, we must plan to that end in a systematic way, meeting difficulties to overcome them and relying mainly on what we can do by our own efforts and not on the doubtful prospect of help from others. It may now be a longer process than at one time seemed possible, but that is all the more reason why we should begin at once.

The key problems are those associated with fuel and power. Although, before the war, hydro-electric power was being developed from the Shannon and the Liffey and further developments of that kind were planned, although the mechanical development of peat fuel had begun and the use of fuel oil for industrial purposes was expanding, we nevertheless proceeded generally on the assumption that coal would always be available to import. A great number of industrial concerns used coal for all purposes, our railways worked on coal and our homes are equipped with coal-burning ranges and grates. The curtailment of coal imports during the war and since has created immense difficulties. Despite all the efforts made to find alternative methods of working, the reduction of coal supplies reduced our industrial capacity and now limits our chances of recovery. It may be that coal production elsewhere will expand to enable us, at some future date, to import it at the pre-war rate, but few will find fault with the wisdom of basing our current policy on a substantial expansion of electricity generating capacity, the rapid development of mechanical peat fuel production and the installation of oil-burning equipment on railways and in industry. I make no special reference to the development of our own coal resources. There is every reason to maximise our own coal output, but it would, I believe, be unwise to place any reliance on the prospect of discovering coal deposits hitherto unknown of such a magnitude as to make a significant difference in our position.

Electricity, peat and fuel oil, in that order, must be the solutions of our fuel and power problems. The generating capacity of the existing Electricity Supply Board stations is 550,000,000 units per year. It is clear that that capacity must be more than doubled. The capacity of new stations now being erected or planned in the near future is, in the case of the Erne station, 200,000,000 units per year from the first quarter of 1951; the Liffey, 10,000,000 units a year from the last quarter of 1948; the Portarlington station, 90,000,000 units, from the third quarter of 1949; another turf-burning station with a capacity of 135,000,000 units, from some later date; and a smaller fuel-burning station to be located at Cork, with a capacity of 10,000,000 units.

General Mulcahy

When the Minister says "at some later date", does he mean later to 1949 or later to 1951?

Mr. Lemass

Later to 1951.

Mr. D. Morrissey

Where is the other large turf-burning one to be located?

Mr. Lemass

The actual site of the station has yet to be determined. There is a general idea as to its location. It will have to be in the vicinity of the Allenwood Bog, but the particular site is not yet settled. Although that was the construction programme when originally framed, it was obvious that it must be further expanded and that every effort must be made to bring the new stations into production with the minimum of delay. Delay is, however, unavoidable where equipment from abroad is concerned. The difficulty of getting the expeditious fulfilment of contracts for delivery of plant has already necessitated the putting back of the completion dates for the Erne until 1951 and for Portarlington to 1949. The Electricity Supply Board is arranging to install oil-burning equipment at the Pigeon House, and it is also, of course, working its existing plant to capacity so that every circumstance adverse to full working means immediate restrictions on consumption, and that situation must continue for some years yet. The Electricity Supply Board cannot undertake to meet the full industrial needs for electric power until at least the new stations now building are completed.

The plans which Bord na Móna made during recent years for a great expansion in machine-turf production will come in part to fruition next year. In 1948 it will have, it is hoped, 16 machines working upon nine bogs under its original programme. It has, however, been decided that by 1948 the county council organisations must be relieved of the responsibility for turf production for the national turf pool so that their staffs may devote their time and attention to their normal work which has fallen into arrears. Therefore, the whole responsibility for producing turf for domestic use in the rationed areas will fall next year on Bord na Móna. I should like here to pay a tribute to the manner in which the directors and officers of that organisation accepted the enormous increase in their responsibilities which that decision entailed, and the manner in which they faced up to the task involved in discharging them. In addition, therefore, to the programme outlined in the White Paper, Bord na Móna will take over in 1948 the production of turf from bogs hitherto worked by county council staffs. They aim to introduce on these bogs a semimechanical process which will not merely expand output but also yield a peat-fuel of high standard quality. Their plans in that respect depend, of course, on getting delivery of adequate equipment this year, but they are not without hope that that will be achieved. For this year the responsibility for the production of turf for the ration areas will remain, as previously, on the county council organisations, supplemented by the camps organisations operated by Bord na Móna. It is, however, necessary to raise very substantially the target for both. We are asking the county councils to produce this year 600,000 tons of turf for delivery to Fuel Importers, Limited, that is to say turf over and above their own local needs. The size of the task given to them can be measured when I mention that last year their output for Fuel Importers, Limited, was 350,000 tons, and that the highest ever achieved by them was 450,000 tons. Perhaps it may be felt that we are already setting a target higher than can be reached and that the delay in commencing operations, due to weather conditions, may now make that target an impossible one. The 600,000 tons of county council turf, supplemented by 200,000 tons of camp turf, are the minimum quantity required in this year if there is not to be another fuel crisis in the eastern counties next winter.

General Mulcahy

Have the county councils given any idea as to whether they can produce this 600,000 tons?

Mr. Lemass

The matter has been discussed with them. They consider that there will be very serious difficulties in stepping production up to 600,000 tons, but their officers have undertaken to make every effort to get as near as possible to that target.

General Mulcahy

Are they expected to express a more considered opinion on the matter soon?

Mr. Lemass

They will be able to state a more precise opinion in the course of the next few weeks. The limiting factor will be labour. It is not clear to what extent labour will be available for the production of turf on the county council bogs.

Mr. Norton

Will the Minister say if the machine-produced turf is included in the 200,000 tons?

Mr. Lemass

The 200,000 tons of camp turf take no account of the machine-produced turf of Bord na Móna.

Mr. Norton

How many tons are expected from the turf camps?

Mr. Lemass

200,000 tons. The minimum requirement of turf to maintain a reasonable ration in the non-turf areas is 10,000 tons a week for 39 weeks, and 20,000 tons a week for 13 weeks, making a total of 650,000 tons, to which must be added a working stock of about 100,000 tons to ensure equitable distribution at all seasons and in all areas.

It will be appreciated that in present circumstances there may be a serious transport problem in connection with this year's turf production. That problem is at present receiving the anxious consideration of my Department and of the other interests concerned. A very large number of industrial concerns are changing their equipment for the utilisation of fuel oil. It would seem that, although there are still restrictions on the delivery of petroleum products generally, fuel oil is in more ample supply than others. We have, however, in this country the difficulty in importing and distributing fuel oil due to the inadequacy of the tankage available for storage.

The estimated bulk storage capacity required for heavy fuel oil, based on a replenishing rate of once in every two months, is 42,000 tons. The existing storage is only 3,200 tons. That is a most serious discrepancy in view of the special nature of the storage required for heavy oil. The question of increasing the storage of heavy oil is being brought to the urgent attention of the oil companies, and it is hoped that they will show some enterprise in the matter. The total quantity of heavy oils allocated to this country in 1947 is considerably more than our pre-war imports. That allocation was based upon the information conveyed to me by industrialists as to their plans for the conversion of their plants from coal to oil. Many firms are experiencing delay and difficulty in getting delivery of the necessary oil-burning equipment. Before the end of the year a substantial proportion of our industries will be independent of coal imports. If the coal supply should improve it would be possible to give greater allocations to public utilities and to other industries.

Mr. Norton

Is that based on the assumption of better storage capacity for fuel oil?

Mr. Lemass

Even without an increase in the storage capacity a very considerable increase in the consumption of fuel oil will be achieved but the maximum expansion in that direction, which might otherwise be possible, will be dependent on the success of the efforts made by the companies in solving this storage problem.

Mr. Norton

Have you any idea when the companies will be able to complete the task of providing the necessary storage?

Mr. Lemass

I could not answer that question. There is more than one company involved and they vary in efficiency in dealing with these matters.

Mr. Norton

Have they been set any target?

Mr. Lemass

The matter is being discussed at the present time. In connection with petroleum products, the House will be disappointed to learn that the project for the establishment of an oil refinery in this country, in connection with which a company was formed before the war, a site reclaimed at the North Wall, Dublin, and certain construction work being done as well as a number of oil tankers acquired, has encountered such substantial difficulties in post-war circumstances that the company has now intimated its inability to proceed.

The present position concerning coal deliveries is, I think, fairly well known. We are receiving 500 tons of good coke and 11,000 tons of very inferior coal weekly from Great Britain.

Mr. Norton

What did you say about the quality of the coke?

Mr. Lemass

It is good coke— officially so described. These quantities are, of course, altogether insufficient to cover even our immediate needs. Britain's coal difficulties are fully appreciated here but nevertheless we feel we have an equitable claim to larger coal deliveries at the earliest date at which British conditions make that possible. I have already pointed out that our imports from Britain are covered pound for pound by goods exported to Great Britain. We ask nothing for nothing. Before the war we had a trade pact with Great Britain under which we agreed to import all our coal requirements from that country, even to the extent of maintaining a customs duty on coal from other sources. We have, therefore, no claim arising out of past trade on other possible suppliers. The drastic reduction of our transport services and the general curtailment of industrial activity due to coal scarcity cannot but react on our trade with Great Britain both as regards our imports and our exports, but it is in Britain's interest, as in our own, to rectify that position as soon as possible. Some weeks ago the United States Government authorised the issue of coal licences to American firms for the shipment of coal to Ireland at the rate of 45,000 tons in April, 27,000 tons in May, and 27,000 tons in June. These allocations have recently been revised and the total of the allocations now made is 135,000 tons, of which 54,000 tons have been licensed for export. There are a number of formalities necessary before coal can be shipped from the United States including not merely the making of the allocation by the allocating authority but three separate licences from three other authorities.

A very considerable difficulty was in fact experienced by the United States exporting firms in bringing the coal for loading to the ports designated by the American authorities where the ships were available to carry it. These difficulties have, however, recently diminished and three cargoes, totalling over 30,000 tons, will load in the next few days. If all the United States coal can be secured it will temporarily relieve our difficulties in considerable degree. It seems probable that the United States authorities will not license further exports after June.

Mr. Norton

What is the price per ton as charged here?

Mr. D. Morrissey

It does not matter what the price is if we can get the coal.

Mr. Norton

Just as a matter of interest.

General Mulcahy

About £6 per ton.

Mr. Lemass

Somewhere over £6 based on our experience of the one cargo which has so far reached this country. Inquiries are being made both on Government level and by private commercial interests as to possible coal supplies from other sources. It is not clear whether it will be possible to obtain any significant quantities although in some instances the fact that we have cattle available for export, concerning which some barter arrangement might be made, has caused sufficient interest to justify closer inquiry. Our main hope of improving coal supplies, however, rests on Great Britain and I feel confident that when production improves in that country and their immediate stock difficulty is reduced they will find it possible to increase exports to us and to improve on the extraordinarily bad quality of the coal now being received.

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

Is that American price f.o.b., or delivered in Dublin?

Mr. Lemass

That is the price delivered in Dublin. Ranking next, perhaps, to fuel problems in the planning of future industrial expansion come the difficulties limiting building and construction. Structural steel has recently been very difficult to secure in sufficient quantities. The position this year to date has been tighter than last year. That is a matter in which we cannot help ourselves by our own efforts, apart from maintaining pressure upon authorities elsewhere to increase our import allocations. The building programme this year will require 25,000 standards approximately of soft wood timber on the basis of the rigid enforcement of the restrictions on the use of building timber where other materials can be substituted. There is good reason to expect that the quantity I have mentioned—25,000 standards— will be available.

Mr. H.M. Dockrell

25,000 standards?

Mr. Lemass

25,000

General Mulcahy

I thought the Minister said 20,000 originally.

Mr. Lemass

No, 25,000 standards. We could use much more but the limiting factor in 1947 should not be timber. Imports of building timber in 1946 amounted to 10,224 standards.

Cement production has been restricted because of coal difficulties, but the two existing plants of Cement, Limited are being converted to fuel oil in this year. When the conversion is completed they will be able to produce to their own maximum capacity of 425,000 tons per annum.

Mr. Norton

When do you expect the conversion to be completed?

Mr. Lemass

The Limerick plant will be working upon fuel oil in the course of the next few weeks, but the Drogheda plant will not be converted earlier than September.

The production of cement last year was 280,000 tons, which required 90,000 tons of coal. The output of the Limerick plant working on fuel oil, plus the very limited output of the Drogheda plant based on its present coal allocation, means that the quantity of cement which will be available for some months to come will be about two-thirds of last year's supply. Output will be back to normal, however, when the Drogheda plant is working on fuel oil and in the meantime the possibility of importing some quantities of cement is being investigated. The company is planning to increase the capacity of its plants and when these changes have been made full supplies of cement to meet all needs will be available, with a surplus for export.

Foundry production was brought to a virtual standstill by the stoppage of the deliveries of foundry coke and coal; but the total capacity of existing foundries is adequate to cover all our needs of cast-iron household goods and new developments are in contemplation by a number of existing firms. The rate at which the building industry recovered from its war-time stagnation can be measured from the fact that output increased from £350,000 in 1945, which was the first month of the present system of control, to £900,000 in February of this year.

The volume of building which public bodies and private firms wish to undertake is, however, in excess of the volume which can be authorised having regard to available resources. The programme for the present year is based on an expenditure on licensed work of £1,000,000 per month or £12,000,000 per year, plus £900,000 for large-scale maintenance work. This rate can be increased if the position concerning personnel and materials should improve, but all the present indications are that an increase will not be possible.

Mr. Norton

Has the Minister indicated a scarcity of personnel?

Mr. Lemass

In some branches of the building trade scarcity of personnel was developing until, of course, recent fuel developments curtailed output. This may be the appropriate place to refer to Irish Steel, Limited, which is the only steel-making concern in this country. Deputies know that Irish Steel, Limited, was begun by a private company which, however, had only a half-completed plant when the outbreak of the war prevented the fulfilment of its plans. The company went into liquidation in 1941 and, later, was restarted with the aid of a Government-guaranteed loan under the Trade Loan Guarantees Act, and in charge of a board appointed by the Government, for the express purpose of keeping going during the war its vital production of steel bars. The board succeeded in doing so despite immense difficulties. Last year the members of the board, all of whom had acted without remuneration and at great personal inconvenience and who on many occasions expressed to me their wish to be relieved as soon as possible of the responsibility so that they could devote their full attention again to their own businesses, reported to me on the state of the company arising out of the exhaustion of its cash resources. It was decided to place the undertaking in the hands of a receiver, who offered it for sale as a going concern.

Mr. Norton

Decided by whom?

Mr. Lemass

It was decided by myself in consultation with the parties interested. While offers for the plant were made by interests who wished to obtain the plant for export and reerection elsewhere, no offer was received from parties who proposed to carry on the concern here. In view of that and in view of the necessity of keeping the industry in existence and our own faith in the future of the industry, it has been decided to promote the establishment of a State-financed company for that purpose. As the matter will come before the Dáil again, I will not deal with it further. The receiver is carrying on the undertaking in the meantime, although at present production is temporarily suspended owing to fuel difficulties.

Deputies will fully realise how important to our economy and to the expansion of our trade is an adequate, efficient and economical transport system. Unfortunately, the coal crisis of this year has caused a serious disarrangement in the plans of Córas Iompair Éireann for the reorganisation of internal transport services. The drastic curtailment of services involved the company in heavy financial losses. These losses may be recovered in time but the fact that the period immediately after the end of the war should have produced losses instead of the expansion and improvement of services which had been contemplated in 1945, must cause reconsideration of some of the plans of the company and perhaps even of the financial obligations placed on it by legislation. However, the company is expanding its road transport fleet and it has already effected considerable improvement in its organisation for handling road freight. It is building a factory for the manufacture of road-vehicle chassis and has further extensions of its manufacturing activities in contemplation. The conversion of its railway locomotives to fuel oil is proceeding. Thirty locomotives are being so converted and when they are in operation it is estimated that there will be a saving of 1,000 tons of coal per week. The construction of new wagons is impeded by the scarcity of materials but 240 wagons were built last year. The general reorganisation of its railway system and its more effective co-ordination with its road services must necessarily be delayed until full operation becomes possible again.

The reduction in railway freight charges effected in 1946 could not be maintained because of increased costs, including wages and materials, and because of the financial consequences of reduced operations. The rates have accordingly been restored to their previous levels, but it is hoped that subsequent reduction will become poslaye sible when regular full-time working is again in operation. The road freight and road passenger rates were also increased.

Irish Shipping, Limited, has continued its successful operation, and plans for the extension of its fleet should bear fruit next year. The company has nine ships in service and has five new ships building, the new ships totalling 28,000 tons. It is the general policy of the company to build up a fleet of serviceable ships which will be, as a minimum, large enough to carry all the essential trade of this country in circumstances where no other ships would be available and, as a maximum, the largest fleet that can be profitably employed in normal trade. The financial reserves which the company has built up, mainly from its marine insurance business, are ample to cover the plans it has in contemplation.

The Government has decided to afford financial assistance to harbour authorities to assist in the completion of works for the improvement of our port and harbour facilities. The grants already approved include £500,000 to the Dublin Port and Docks Board, being two-thirds of the cost of constructing a new graving dock capable of accommodating ships up to 18,000 tons; £14,150 to Waterford in connection with a scheme to which Córas Iompair Eireann will contribute £25,000; £82,000 to Tralee and Fenit Harbour; £30,000 for Killybegs, £9,800 for Arklow, £18,000 for Westport, a grant of £2,000 for the provision of cattle lairages at Sligo and £4,130 for dredging at Burtonport. Further proposals for financial aid for port and harbour developments are under consideration from Dublin, Cork, Sligo, Letterkenny, Rathmullen, Wicklow, Buncrana, Dundalk, Kilrush, Youghal and New Ross. The total estimated cost of all these schemes runs into several million pounds.

Mr. Corish

Was the aid in all cases requested by the harbour authorities?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. Corish

In all cases?

Mr. Lemass

In all cases it was requested by the harbour authority. I have emphasised that the future prosperity and welfare of the country is dependent on its capacity to expand its export trade and that such expansion must, in part at least, be achieved by building up export business in industrial goods. Any development of industrial export requires that the problems of power and fuel, of building and construction, and transport reorganisation, to which I have briefly referred, must be overcome.

There is one other important matter which is directly related to the question of external trade and on which decisions must be taken this year. The House is aware that multilateral international discussions are proceeding on the basis of draft proposals prepared by the United States Government for the general reduction of tariffs, the elimination of preferences and the removal of other trade barriers, and for the establishment of an industrial trade organisation, the members of which would undertake commitments in regard to such matters. In connection with these international negotiations we have had preliminary conferences with the British authorities, with which country we have a trade treaty which provides for the mutual concession of tariff preferences in regard to particular products specified in the agreement. We have trade treaties with other countries, but in view of the general direction of our trade the treaty with Great Britain is of major importance and anything which affects the basis on which trade with Great Britain is conducted is of vital significance to us.

One of the main matters arising in the discussions between Great Britain and the United States is the abolition, or at least the binding, of preferences and the British authorities have agreed in principle to negotiate on that basis; that is to say to negotiate the abolition or reduction of preferences which they now concede or enjoy under bilateral treaties against the reduction of tariffs in the United States and elsewhere. As the preliminary discussions in which Great Britain is involved are proceeding at present, it is not possible to forecast their outcome but further discussions with the British authorities are contemplated when the preliminary negotiations to which I have referred have reached the stage at which definite decisions may be made. It is clear that we have an interest in the attitude of the British Government in its negotiations with other countries. In accordance with the procedure which is being followed the preferences secured by the Trade Treaty of 1938 with Great Britain are time-expired under the actual provisions of that treaty but obviously the maintenance of the treaty is of interest to us only so long as we continue to enjoy them. To secure those preferences and the free entry of all our products to the British market which the 1938 Treaty ensured we conceded preferential tariff rates and certain rights of free entry to British products. If, arising out of the Geneva negotiations, now proceeding, the British Government undertakes to abolish or reduce preferences in the British market or to surrender preferential rights in other markets then it is clear that discussions for the revision of the Trade Treaty with this country must follow. Such discussions cannot in any case be long delayed, as it is desirable to have the provisions of that treaty brought into closer relationship with present trading conditions.

A principal feature of the American draft proposals is that any tariff reductions or undertaking not to increase tariffs conceded by one country to another in direct negotiations shall be generally applicable to all members of the proposed international trade organisation. The policy of the Government in regard to these matters must be determined by events and particularly by the nature of the general agreement which may emerge from the discussions. It is our desire to have trade agreements with all countries with which we have commercial contacts, and particularly with Great Britain, on a basis which will promote the growth of profitable and mutually beneficial trade of a character which will contribute to our agricultural and industrial development and which will take account of special circumstances affecting our economic situation.

Having regard to the pattern of our export trade it is probable that its regulation by means of bilateral arrangements with our principal customers and the exchange on a bilateral basis of special trade benefits is the arrangement which would be most conducive to its expansion. If, however, the countries with which we have closest trade relations and existing bilateral agreements have decided that a policy of non-discrimination is in their best interests it may be assumed that we will have to deal with them on that basis. We have always in this country been keenly conscious of the fact that the prosperity of other countries had a direct reaction on our circumstances and, I may say, particularly the prosperity of Great Britain. In so far as it is true that the rise of prosperity throughout the world can be measured by an increase in international trade, we will welcome any measure which tends to promote it, and we can say that the measures which we took in the past to make good deficiencies in our economical organisation and to promote the expansion of industry in the special conditions existing before the war were not specifically directed to securing the reduction of the volume of our total trade. We believed that the economic security and higher employment which we anticipated from the measures adopted would in fact enable us to make a more useful contribution to the growth of international trade and prosperity and to the development of satisfactory trading relations with other States. We have a relatively large and growing market for capital goods, for industrial materials and many classes of consumer goods. Our visible imports have always exceeded our visible exports and our tariff and other import restrictions were designed only to promote our own economic development and not to create difficulties for others and, subject to them, we have placed no impediments in the way of our people in buying abroad to the limit of our resources.

We will seek to ensure that in return for the trade we can give to other States we will, in turn, have adequate opportunity of trading in the products which we produce or can produce in excess of our own needs while, at the same time, retaining such freedom of action as is required to build up our own production and repair the economic consequences of centuries of external rule. Assuming that we can overcome our current difficulties limiting increased production and secure through the operation of a multilateral trade arrangement or by bilateral agreements such international conditions as will facilitate the expansion of external trade we must have in mind a picture of the industrial organisation which we believe can be built up here. There is, of course, no advantage in trying to establish ourselves in trades in which other countries have such preponderant advantages that we cannot compete with them.

Mr. D. Morrissey

Hear, hear!

Mr. Lemass

There is no use expecting that we can develop satisfactory industries on any basis except the most modern and efficient equipment, the most competent management, and the capacity of industrial workers for hard and skilful work. We have already made it as clear as words could make it that Government assistance in any form to any undertaking— including protection by tariff or by quota—will be subject to the satisfaction of those conditions. There are, however, a number of industries in which these conditions exist or can be created and it is on their expansion we must mainly rely.

Mr. Davin

Does that apply to Irish Steel?

Mr. Lemass

Yes. At the present time most of the protective measures considered necessary before the war for the stimulation of industrial development are suspended. Where they have been retained, it is either because there are special circumstances affecting the industries concerned which make that course necessary, or because their retention facilitates the regulation of the importation and distribution of the goods to which they apply. It is, perhaps, necessary to re-emphasise that the suspension of these quotas and tariffs does not imply any change of policy in the matter of affording protection to industry where required. It may be that changed circumstances in international trade, or altered conditions at home, may require reconsideration at a stage of the rate of duty or form of protection provided under existing law in particular cases, but it is and will be the aim of the Government to afford all reasonable facilities and assistance to promote the establishment and expansion of sound industrial enterprises.

It is obvious our expectations of a lively interest in the industrial possibilities of this country in the post-war era were not unduly optimistic, judging by the very large number of plans and proposals for new enterprises submitted to my Department during the past year. The fulfilment of many of these plans will be delayed by present fuel difficulties, by shortages of building and other materials, and the problem of obtaining early installation of plant and machinery, but in many cases progress has been possible. A number of new concerns succeeded in getting into production in 1946. Proposals by private firms covering over 50 classes of goods not previously manufactured in this country have been approved, many of them representing very important industries, and quite a number are planned on a scale which involves export business. Although the field for industrial expansion represented by commodities not previously made here is considerable, nevertheless I believe some of our older industries offer the best prospects of early extension into export trade on a significant scale.

One of the most important industries from the point of view of its suitability for development here and its export potentialities is the weaving of woollen and worsted fabrics. The total pre-war output of our mills was 4,500,000 square yards, but at that time we still imported 6,300,000 square yards of woollen and worsted cloths and 3,500,000 square yards of union cloths.

On the basis of internal trade there is still considerable scope for expansion. Export potentialities are considerable. At present we can only allow token exports, which are designed to establish international trading contacts and open the way for greater trade later. The quantity exported in 1946 was 180,000 square yards.

There are a number of new mills planned which will add substantially to our productive capacity. These projects include the increased production of worsteds, the manufacture of light-weight woollen fabrics and the production of shoddy cloths. The full development of the woollen and worsted industry includes the installation of adequate spinning and wool-combing plants. Proposals for the increased production of light-weight yarns have been approved. Wool-combing is carried on by one firm, but new developments in this field are under discussion. The potentialities of the woollen and worsted weaving industry extend to the manufacture of woollen underwear. Here also considerable developments, including production for export, are being undertaken.

In other branches of the textile industries I should mention the following developments: Plant is being installed in a factory in the Dublin area for the production of spun-rayons yarn. In Waterford an existing factory is being extended for the installation of plant for the same purpose. A company has been formed for the manufacture of rayon fabrics from continuous filament yarn. A cotton-spinning plant at Athlone is expected to be in production this year. Plans for the expansion of cotton weaving by existing firms by approximately 50 per. cent. above pre-war output have been approved. A number of other proposals in relation to woollens, rayon, cotton and linen are under discussion.

The tanning industry also offers very favourable prospects. There would be little difficulty at present in exporting the bulk of our production and, as in the case of woollen cloths, only token exports are now allowed. The total capacity of existing sole-leather tanneries is probably equal to internal requirements, but we have been notified of a number of new projects for the production of this type of leather. The production of some classes of upper leathers is still below our needs, but developments which it is hoped would come to fruition this year will expand this production and in these leathers also new enterprises have been notified. The capacity of the boot and shoe industry is probably equal to internal needs in normal circumstances but it is known that many existing concerns are expanding their plants and in some cases production for export is contemplated.

I do not propose to give a detailed review of the position in all industries. I have mentioned some which are or may become of special importance, but proposals for expanded production have been discussed with representatives of practically every industry now carried on in the country. The general policy of the Government is to promote the fullest possible expansion of industry by private enterprise. Where, however, special circumstances require exceptional measures, organisations of a commercial character have been set up under State auspices for particular purposes and these organisations will have an important part to play in our economic development.

The board of Cemici, Teoranta, is actively investigating the prospects of manufacturing our requirements of ammonium sulphate and copper sulphate and will, later, extend its inquiries into other chemical fields. The country's dependence upon external sources for industrial chemicals was emphasised by our war-time experiences. It was very desirable that the production of these essential goods should be facilitated, and the maximum encouragement and assistance will be given to private firms interesting themselves in those lines. Cemici, Teoranta, will confine its activities to commodities in which private firms are not interested or which, because of their nature, could not be successfully produced here except on a monopoly basis.

A fuller exploration of our mineral resources is in contemplation and it is intended that Mianrai, Teoranta, will withdraw from its current commercial activities which, in the main, were undertaken as a war-time measure only, and it will devote its activities exclusively for some years to the fulfilment of a comprehensive exploration programme on lines which have been laid down by expert consultants.

As I informed the Dáil to-day at Question Time, the existing coal mine at Slieveardagh is being offered for sale. The expenditure which is involved in the proposed exploration programme will exceed £500,000. These proposals will be the subject of legislation and the Dáil will be given ample opportunity for a discussion of them. Therefore, I do not propose to refer to them now in greater detail. There will be no confining of the company's activities to the mineral resources of particular areas.

Mr. Davin

What is the up-to-date cost of the Slieveardagh mines?

Mr. Lemass

I do not think it would be possible for me to give that at the moment. The fuller exploration of the valuable Monaghan gypsum deposits will proceed this year and money is provided in the Vote for that purpose. These deposits have already been the foundation of important industrial developments and it is expected that they will be further extended.

During the past year there has been much controversy concerning the tourist trade and I think it is desirable to get the position clearly stated. There can, I think, be very little question of the importance of developing tourist business as a long-term enterprise. The figures which I have given as to our external trade and the emphasis they place on our need for increased export business, if we are to balance our trading account, will alone make it clear that no possible field of development should be neglected. The tourist trade is an export business of very high value. We have not, however, taken any active steps to encourage it in present circumstances, mainly because we are not ready to handle it. The total number of bedrooms in Irish registered hotels is no more than 16,000. Our restricted transport facilities, limited food rations and the impracticability of carrying through plans for holiday resort development, make it wiser to delay any active publicity campaign until we can be sure that the tourists who may come can be accommodated. I should, however, make it clear that tourist business has no effect on domestic food rations. The allocation of rationed foodstuffs to hotels and restaurants is fixed. The allocations vary with the domestic rations and they are not increased because of an anticipated increase in business in these establishments. The stoppage of all tourist business, as is sometimes suggested, would not, therefore, affect existing domestic rations in any way whatever. There is, however, a completely mistaken idea of the character of the visitors who come here in the summer months. More than four out of every five are people of Irish birth or origin, coming home to spend their holidays with their relatives in Ireland.

Mr. Coogan

How do you get that figure?

Mr. Lemass

By the information which they must give when applying for ration cards. I cannot imagine that anybody would want to stop their coming here. Certainly I cannot agree to impose any avoidable restriction on their coming. Of the balance of our visitors, a very high proportion do not come here for a holiday in the ordinary sense. They are people coming from abroad in connection with trade matters, either for the purpose of buying goods we have available for export, or selling us goods that we require. Our only regret is that not enough are coming to offer us supplies or to initiate new trade for Irish producers.

Mr. Davin

Do they eat dry bread in the hotels?

Mr. Lemass

I do not think it is necessary. Every hotel gets an allocation of butter which is related to the number of meals they serve, an allocation which varies with the domestic ration and there are substantial supplies of non-creamery butter which is not rationed. However, my feeling is that there is no justification whatever for imposing the elaborate controls and checks on visitors to Ireland which would be needed if we were to try to discriminate between those who come here, between persons of Irish birth or origin and people of other origins, or between people who are coming here on business purposes and those who are coming here purely for relaxation. The long-term development of tourist business is based entirely on goodwill. While we may not wish to encourage any exceptional number of visitors in 1947, it would be a very short-sighted policy to create such hostility by our restrictions and regulations that nobody would want to come here. The value of tourist trade as an export business can, I believe, be made second in importance only to agricultural products and if we succeed in achieving that result, a large part of the economic difficulties which we foresee ahead of us will be minimised.

The work of the Tourist Board includes, however, the very important matter of developing amenities at our holiday resorts. Unfortunately, many of its schemes are held up by reason of the inability of local authorities in present circumstances to afford the cooperation required, which in practically every case is essential for the successful development of the board's projects on a profit-earning basis. The board is by legislation confined to projects which are certified as likely to be profit-earning. The number of these projects will be very few this year.

The development of civil air services has been impeded by difficulties in obtaining delivery of equipment, particularly planes. Consequently, the inauguration of new services planned for this spring has had to be postponed. A number of additional planes are on order and, subject to their delivery, new services will be operated this year. The frequency of the services on Dublin-London, Dublin-Liverpool, and Dublin-Shannon services will be doubled as from Monday next. The new services which will be opened this year, as soon as equipment is available, are: Dublin-Glasgow, Dublin-Belfast-Liverpool, Dublin-Brussels, Dublin-Manchester-Amsterdam, Dublin-Glasgow - Oslo - Stockholm, Dublin - Rome, Shannon-London and Shannon-Paris. The frequency in each case will be determined by the demand for accommodation, but the services will begin at the rate of two per week. Other services are also contemplated when the required commercial rights have been negotiated. The transatlantic service will not, it is expected, begin until next October owing to delay in the delivery of aircraft. A twice-weekly transatlantic service is planned. The delay in procuring the delivery of aircraft, particularly in connection with the transatlantic service, has necessitated an increase in subsidy this year as the organisation required for the new services, including the recruitment and training of flight crews, ground engineers and other personnel had been begun. The free airport at Shannon will come formally into existence next Monday.

These are the general matters to which I wish to refer but in addition to them, the Dáil will, no doubt, desire to have a brief review of the position in respect to goods which are now scarce and the scarcity of which is a cause of hardship. The first of these is butter. The continuance of the abnormal winter weather throughout March and early April destroyed the hopes I entertained earlier that the expansion of butter production in the present month would enable a higher ration to be provided by mid-April. The total production of creamery butter in the year to May 1st next was approximately 540,000 cwts., being a reduction of 60,000 cwts. on the previous year. The Minister for Agriculture estimates that the production for the 12 months after 1st May will be 575,000 cwts.

Mr. D. Morrissey

He is an optimist.

Mr. Lemass

That production would not permit of a six-ounce ration for the whole year, which would require about 605,000 cwts. It is a matter for consideration whether the ration should be maintained at six ounces for the summer and reduced to four ounces for whatever minimum period would be necessary in the winter or to keep the ration at four ounces during the earlier weeks of the summer and raise it to six ounces for the rest of the year. I have decided to adopt the second of these courses, as I think the full ration during the winter is more important, and also because there is, of course, some element of speculation in assuming a total production of 575,000 cwts.

Mr. D. Morrissey

A big element.

Mr. Lemass

The ration of creamery butter will therefore be raised to 4 ozs. as from next Saturday week, May 3rd. Examination has been made of the practicability of bringing farmers' butter on the ration.

Mr. Norton

How long will the 4-oz. ration continue before going on to the 6-oz. ration?

Mr. Lemass

There is a matter to which I am going to refer and on which I would welcome the views of Deputies which will affect that decision. It is, of course, difficult to forecast what the rate of production is going to be. If the estimate of the Minister for Agriculture proves likely to be correct and if the matter to which I refer is considered a practical arrangement, I should hope that the 4-oz. ration need not be maintained for more than a couple of months out of the 12. As I was saying, the examination was made of the practicability of bringing farmers' butter on the ration, but a satisfactory method of doing so has not been devised, and I think the new situation in relation to butter prices and the subsidy on creamery milk makes it completely impracticable. Consideration, however, has been given to the idea—and this is the matter to which I referred in replying to Deputy Norton—of keeping the standard ration of creamery butter at a lower level in certain counties, where farmers' butter is generally available, during the months in which it is in ample supply. I had in mind the idea of maintaining the 4-oz. ration in these areas until the autumn and, on that basis, the ration could be increased to 6 ozs. in the remainder of the country at a much earlier date.

Mr. D. Morrissey

I hope that crack-brained idea will be investigated still further.

Mr. Lemass

I do not think it is crack-brained; I think it is quite sensible.

Mr. Hughes

It is absurd.

Mr. D. Morrissey

It is the most crack-brained idea——

Mr. Lemass

Not because the Deputy says so.

Mr. D. Morrissey

——that ever came from the far side of the House and that is saying something.

Mr. Lemass

The position concerning margarine is that production cannot be maintained at its existing level on our present supply of the necessary raw materials, and the increase in the butter ration will involve a corresponding drop in the margarine ration. The margarine ration must, in any event, cease when the butter ration reaches six ounces and it cannot be resumed until additional materials are imported. We have received an open International Emergency Food Council allocation of 5,000 tons of vegetable oils, but up to date the buying organisation which we set up, Oils and Fats, Limited, has not succeeded in locating any supplies for early delivery. In connection with butter, Deputies will have seen the announcement of the Government's decision to pay a higher price for milk delivered to creameries during the coming season.

General Mulcahy

Can the Minister say how the margarine production will be disposed of?

Mr. Lemass

Margarine is being sold on the basis of the ration, and the ration will vary with the butter ration, and will disappear when the butter ration reaches six ounces.

General Mulcahy

Who can buy margarine then?

Mr. Lemass

There will be no margarine.

General Mulcahy

There will be no margarine production?

Mr. Lemass

There will be no more production, unless and until the 5,000 tons of vegetable oils which have been allocated can be imported. Up to the present, these supplies have not been located anywhere by our buying organisation. I was referring to the Government's decision to pay a subsidy and a higher price for milk delivered to creameries because of the exceptional circumstances which prevail and to encourage the maximum delivery of milk for butter manufacture. Arising out of that increase and for the purpose of conferring a benefit on the producers of non-creamery butter, the retail price of butter has been advanced to 2/8 per lb. To maintain that price, in view of the higher milk price, a very substantial increase in butter subsidy will be necessary, bringing the total subsidy to over £2,000,000 in this year. It is hoped, however, that the change will increase milk deliveries to some extent in this year and encourage producers to plan increased production in subsequent years.

The effect of rationing flour and bread has been to reduce the weekly consumption of flour by about 16 per cent., from 65,000 sacks per week to 55,000 sacks per week.

Mr. D. Morrissey

Does that relate to bakers' flour?

Mr. Lemass

All flour. It is of interest to note that 55,000 sacks weekly was the normal average pre-war consumption. Since I spoke previously on this matter in the Dáil, we have been allocated 68,000 tons of wheat by the International Emergency Food Council for the present period, which will enable us to maintain distribution at the present rate to the end of June, leaving a five weeks' working stock, which is the very minimum on which even distribution is possible. No indication has yet been received of the quantities which will be forthcoming after June 30th.

Mr. Cosgrave

Does that mean five weeks after June?

Mr. Lemass

There is a working stock of five weeks, but Deputies must not consider that as being available at any time, because the maintenance of even and regular distribution in all areas necessitates a minimum working stock of five weeks, which must always be there. No indication, as I say, has yet been received of the quantities which will be forthcoming after June 30th, but it is hoped to get sufficient to carry us on to next harvest without any reduction in the basic ration. The indications are that wheat will continue to be scarce next year, but it is probable that the position will be clarified in the near future, particularly as a result of the International Wheat Conference which is now concluding in London and at which we have been represented. At that conference, we put our requirements for the year at 405,000 tons and indicated our willingness to enter into commitments to purchase that quantity for some years ahead.

Mr. Norton

Is that the estimate for this year or next year?

Mr. Lemass

The year from 1st July on.

General Mulcahy

Can the Minister say if that estimate is based on an estimated production here, and, if so, what that estimated production is?

Mr. Lemass

No. No estimate of production has yet been made, and it is not clear that the wheat council provided for in the agreement discussed at the Wheat Conference will in fact be concerned with wheat allocations this year. It is possible that the allocations will be made by the International Emergency Food Council as before, and the International Emergency Food Council will be working on three-monthly allocations. We will make an application for the first quarter of the cereal year on the basis of having our total requirements met. Applications for subsequent quarters will clearly be related to our own internal production.

Mr. Norton

If 405,000 tons represent our demand at this conference, is it not related to a home production of a certain quantity of wheat?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. Norton

What is the assumption with regard to our home production?

Mr. Lemass

The assumption is that the balance required would be available from home sources, but the balance required would, of course, vary with the size of our ration, the wheat extraction rate in force and other factors. In so far as it is necessary to make an estimate of our requirements, not merely this year but in subsequent years, the figure of 405,000 tons was considered to be the most reliable.

Mr. Norton

What was our home production last year?

Mr. Lemass

Something like 300,000 tons.

Mr. Hughes

90,000 tons down.

Mr. Norton

That is, 700,000 tons would be necessary next year.

Mr. Lemass

If we get 300,000 tons this year, we would not require the 400,000 tons to maintain the present ration, but I think it likely that we will get a very substantial reduction in yield this year.

Mr. D. Morrissey

The Minister said that our production last year was 300,000 tons?

Mr. Lemass

Our production for flour manufacture.

Mr. D. Morrissey

I am not trying to score a point; I merely want to get this matter clear, because it is terribly important. Home-grown wheat to an amount of 300,000 tons was delivered to the millers last year.

Mr. Lemass

I am giving the Deputy a very rough figure.

Mr. D. Morrissey

It is terribly rough.

Mr. Lemass

285,000 to 290,000 tons— I think it was nearer to 300,000 tons.

Mr. D. Morrissey

I do not want to tie the Minister down, but I do not want it to be understood that there was a production of 300,000 tons.

Mr. Lemass

The amounts required for flour and bread subsidies to maintain flour and bread prices at the present levels are placed in the Estimate at £2,000,000 and £175,000 respectively. I want to make it clear that the decreases shown as compared with actual expenditure last year are very provisional. No reliable estimate can be made, in the absence of precise information, as to the total supply which will be available or as to the proportions of imported and native wheats. Without the subsidy, the price of flour of 85 per cent. extraction, on the basis of grist of 12½ per cent. imported and 87½ per cent. dried native wheat, would be 83/6 per sack, as compared with the present fixed price of 63/6 per sack. The saving to consumers is, therefore, £1 per sack and, on a weekly consumption of 55,000 sacks, the cost of subsidy would be over £2,750,000. That figure would make no provision for changes in the grist throughout the year. With flour at 83/6 per sack, batch bread, sold without subsidy, would cost 1/5 per 4-lb loaf as compared with the present price of 1/1½.

In connection with tea, there were important developments during the year. The International Emergency Food Council control over the distribution of world tea supplies ceased as from 1st January, 1947. While this control operated, the purchase of teas for world consumption was largely left in the hands of the British Ministry of Food, which had contracts with the Governments of India and Ceylon to buy the bulk of the production of those countries. One reason why the control ceased was the refusal of the Governments of India and Ceylon to renew the contracts for bulk purchases and their desire that the free auctions should be held in their countries, as from the 1st January, 1947, for such teas as they were able to make available for export from that date. During the war, we obtained most of our tea from the British Ministry of Food because of the circumstance that, in pre-war years, almost all our tea was ordered and supplied through London merchants. In the last few years of the war, when international control of distribution was applied, we were able to obtain only relatively small quantities of tea in addition to what we were getting from the British Ministry of Food. Our supplies from that Ministry for the greater part of the war period were reduced to almost negligible proportions. As a result of our experience, it had been decided that, as soon as circumstances permitted, we should purchase our tea supplies on our own account in the countries of origin and arrange for direct shipment to this country. The opportunity to give effect to this decision arose in consequence of the lifting of control from the 1st January, 1947, and of the decisions by the Governments of India and Ceylon to restore free auctions.

It was not, however, expected that international control would be removed so early and our arrangements for future buying, without Government intervention or without the intervention of a Government-sponsored organisation, have not been completed. Moreover, there is no certainty that, in the future, supplies will be so freely available to us that our internal control over distribution, by rationing, can be removed. Consequently, it is necessary, at any rate for the time being, that our tea purchases on our own account in countries of origin should be made by one central organisation. It has, therefore, been decided that our supplies for 1947-48 should be purchased by Tea Importers, Ltd., the company which was established during the war for the purpose of buying tea. In 1946, we received from International Emergency Food Council an allocation of 18,000,000 lbs. of tea, which the council decided should be supplied to us through the British Ministry of Food. That allocation was in respect of the period of 12 months ended 31st March last.

Mr. Norton

What were the pre-war imports?

Mr. Lemass

About 24,000,000 lbs. Deliveries on foot of that allocation are in course of being completed. We have been informed, however, that, after we have received that allocation, it will not be possible for the British Ministry of Food to provide us with further teas, pending the landing here of the supplies which Tea Importers, Ltd., propose to buy from the 1947 Indian crop, which comes on the market from the 1st June, 1947. Consequently, it was decided that buying by Tea Importers, Ltd., should commence at once from such quantities of 1946 teas as are still available in India and from the Ceylon crop of 1947, which is marketed earlier in the calendar year. Tea Importers, Ltd., have already purchased over 2,000,000 lbs. of tea, and it is anticipated that they will be able, in the next few weeks, to purchase sufficient quantities of tea to enable the existing ration to be maintained without interruption. It is expected that the first of the teas bought in India and Ceylon, amounting to 2,000,000 lbs., will be landed in this country towards the end of May. In addition to these teas which are being shipped, there is at present available in the country towards meeting the immediate national needs a stock of three or four months' supply at the existing ration rate. If it be necessary, these stocks will be utilised to maintain the ration pending the arrival and distribution of the overseas supplies.

For next year, the amount of our purchases will depend upon the extent of the 1947 crop of tea in India which will come on the market in the beginning of June and for some months afterwards. We are confident, however, that it will be possible to buy sufficient to maintain the existing ration and it is not unlikely that we shall be successful in buying still greater quantities and making it possible to increase the ration towards the end of the year.

In the case of sugar, it was estimated at the end of September last that production from the 1946 beet crop would be not less than 75,000 tons of sugar. It was assumed that that quantity, with the surplus available from the previous campaign, would have been sufficient to maintain the ration rate unaltered until next November. The unofficial strike of workers at the sugar factories at the commencement of the campaign made it necessary to reduce the domestic ration to half a pound per person from the week commencing 23rd November last. It was at a ¼ lb. for two weeks and was then raised again to ½ lb. Furthermore, the delay in manufacturing operations occasioned by the strike resulted in a decrease of 14,000 tons in the quantity of sugar obtained, the total production being 61,000 tons as compared with the estimated 75,000 tons. That reduced production would be only sufficient to enable the present domestic ration of ½ lb. weekly to be maintained, in addition to the allowances to manufacturers and other wholesale users at the same rates as last year.

When the manufacture of sugar was suspended during the strike, we made application to the International Emergency Food Council for an allocation of sugar from abroad for 1946, but without success. Supplies were then sought in the free market and early in the present year 24,000 tons of raw cane sugar were purchased in Peru. The difficulties experienced in securing the necessary shipping from Peru have now been solved, and it is expected that the sugar in question will be landed in Dublin in three lots of approximately 8,000 tons each, between mid-May and mid-July.

In consequence of fuel difficulties, it will not be possible to have that sugar refined, but as it is suitable for use in manufacture I propose to have a proportion of the manufacturers' allowances drawn from it and to use the refined sugar so saved to increase the domestic ration to three-quarters of a pound from a date towards the end of June. It may be necessary to require that some proportion of the domestic ration will be taken in brown sugar. The International Emergency Food Council did not allocate to this country any sugar from a controlled source for the calendar year 1947, but allocated us 39,000 tons of raw cane sugar, to be procured in the free market and to include the Peruvian sugar already purchased. The International Emergency Food Council has been asked to designate sources of supply for the balance, 15,000 tons, but no reply has been received to date. If necessary, however, it is proposed to purchase the further quantities allocated in the free market, if it can be imported to this country at a reasonable price. The indications are that the home crop for 1947 will yield about 65,000 tons, and the balance of the allocation yet to be purchased and carried over as a reserve, plus purchases abroad in next year, will enable the higher ration to be maintained throughout 1948.

In the case of petrol, during last year our total imports were 26,800,000 gallons, against a pre-war import of 44,000,000 gallons. We have been allocated 18,000,000 for the first half of 1947. There would, therefore, have been no difficulty in maintaining the increased ration provided last year if other circumstances had remained similar. The deterioration in the coal situation has, however, thrown a heavy burden on road transport which, in turn, places heavy demands on our petrol supplies to maintain essential public transport. So far, it has been possible to meet these demands without reductions in other directions, but if the coal situation does not improve, I could not undertake that there will be no adjustments in the present rationing scheme to provide the supplies needed by the augmented public road transport services.

The kerosene allocation for the first half of this year represents a substantial increase on our pre-war imports. There has, however, been a very substantial increase in the number of agricultural tractors—an increase of over 50 per cent.—and the demand for kerosene for use in tractors has risen correspondingly, which makes it still necessary to maintain rationing for domestic users. Last year, however, the domestic kerosene ration was considerably increased, the total household consumption being 5,500,000 gallons, as compared with 4,500,000 in 1945, 4,000,000 in 1944, and 2,500,000 in 1943. All demands for kerosene from tractor owners and other industrial users can be met from the supplies available. Quantities of gas and fuel oil available this year are also substantially higher than last year and so far all demands of industrial users adapting their plants to fuel oil have been met.

Finally, I should say a few words about the present fuel position. We commenced the present position on July 1st with a dump stock of 180,000 tons and production planned on a scale estimated to be sufficient to leave a carry-over of 100,000 tons on June 30th then commenced. The abnormal weather of last summer and autumn completely upset those plans, while at the same time the exceptionally cold winter created a higher demand for fuel. Nevertheless, we could have got through the winter without exceptional shortage if there had been at any time since January a single period of two or three weeks of dry weather which would have enabled the 100,000 tons of turf still in the bogs to be put into condition for use. No such dry spell was experienced and the present fuel shortage is the result. The ration for the present period has been fixed at half a ton and while it is probable that this ration will be available for everyone before the end of the period, the requirements of the present time are difficult to meet. Fuel Importers, Limited, have accumulated over 3,000 tons of firewood blocks by purchase. They have produced a further 1,800 tons of blocks themselves and have on hands about 11,000 tons of logs for conversion into blocks. Firewood is now rationed as equivalent to turf. I hesitated to take that step, as I was doubtful of its effect on supplies and probably there has been some effect. Nevertheless, it is expected that 25 per cent. of the present ration can be met in firewood. Turf movement into the non-turf area is improving with improved weather. For the present, however, supplies of dry turf are being confined to small traders and to corporation depôts which are supplying the poorer areas of Dublin and similar arrangements are being made in other districts. We will end the season with no stocks, against the 100,000 tons we anticipated; and that fact emphasises the urgent need for maximum production this year.

The system of rationing domestic fuel which hitherto had been in force was not very rigid, but it worked reasonably well so long as the total supplies were adequate. The need for a closer control of fuel distribution became apparent when decreased supplies and higher demand occurred simultaneously and, in view of the possibility of recurring difficulties next winter, it has been decided to replace the present system of rationing fuel by one which will enable a closer control to be maintained over fuel sales and distribution. The next fuel rationing system will come into operation in the autumn.

There are other matters with which the Department of Industry and Commerce is concerned to which I have not referred. One of the most important of these is price control. I have refrained from dealing with it because we had a special discussion on the subject in the House a short time ago. I will content myself with pointing out that the latest cost-of-living index number for February, 1947, shows no change as compared with February, 1946, or February, 1945. As for the other functions of my Department, there is no special matter to which I wish to direct attention but I will, of course, be prepared to give Deputies any information which they may desire.

Mr. D. Morrissey

I move the amendment standing in my name:—

That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration.

The Minister has delivered a very long and very comprehensive review of the national economic situation, lasting nearly two hours, and when one places what the Minister has stated in the last two hours in relation to industry and commerce beside the well-known situation in which our agricultural industry is to-day, anyone can say without fear of contradiction that the national economic position is more serious, not only at the moment but in regard to its outlook for the immediate future, than perhaps at any time in our history. The Minister apparently recognises the gravity of it and I think it is not unfair to say that his long speech discloses that we are in a state of economic helplessness in this country, that we are completely dependent for our very existence on outside sources. If the Minister's long review can show or suggest anything, I think his case, at least by implication, was that our present situation—and so far as he can see into the future—is due entirely to causes beyond our control. With that I do not entirely agree. I am not going to be the one to suggest that we can meet all our requirements out of our own resources, and by our own unaided efforts. I never did, but on the other hand I think that I am entitled to say that if the years prior to the outbreak of war had been devoted more to economic planning than to political play-acting, our position would not be as serious as it is.

I regret that the Minister's speech could not have been typed and circulated to Deputies two or three days ago, so that it could be closely studied by them, and so that this appallingly serious position could be discussed here fully with, as I say, a thorough examination of the situation as disclosed by the Minister. It is not easy, in fact, it is impossible, for anyone who sat here during the last two hours listening to the Minister cover an extraordinary range of activities, in the course of which a large number of figures were introduced, to hope to discuss that speech in any sort of a comprehensive way. Certainly, I am not going to attempt to do it.

I propose to devote myself to a few points, and to give my main reasons for moving to refer the Estimate back. Our position, if the Minister had been acting up to his responsibilities, need not be as serious as it is. I am sorry, in view of what I am now going to say, that there are not more members of the Labour Party in the House. The Minister passed over one of the biggest factors that contributed to shortages in this country during the 12 months under review. He made only the slightest passing reference to it. I refer to the unofficial and lightning strikes which took place in this country in the last 12 months—lightning and unofficial —and which were aimed at the things that are vital to the community of this country, strikes which had a very serious effect on the food and fuel required for this community. The Minister did not think it wise in his long review to refer to them. He mentioned the effect of one unofficial strike on one essential—sugar. The effect of that unofficial and lightning strike was not only to reduce the ration to consumers to a half-pound, but to inflict very heavy and severe losses on the producers of beet. Some of the beet grown—it was safe up to a point—when it was pulled from the ground became an absolute dead loss and never saw the factory. The Minister knows that. That is that.

The Minister knows that, as a result of another strike, perhaps not of the same nature—he will not admit this but he knows it—tens of thousands of people had not a fire in this city and in other parts of the non-turf areas during the past three months. The Minister knows that at the moment unofficial strikes are being aimed at vital commodities. He knows, if he is in close touch with things as he should be, that they are not accidental sporadic strikes. There is no necessity in this country, and there is no excuse or defence, for lightning and unofficial strikes. Here every worker is free to join any trade union he wishes and trade unions are entitled to operate in a legitimate and lawful way with the full measure of freedom that is given to them by the community.

Mr. Davin

That freedom was denied to your knowledge some years ago when men were dismissed because they would not join certain approved unions.

Mr. D. Morrissey

I know that is so, and I am going to leave that to you. I do not want that red herring dragged across a challenge to the community, because this is a challenge to the community. It is a challenge also to the trade unions, and the trade unions and the Minister on behalf of the community will have to meet it.

General Mulcahy

And the working man.

Mr. D. Morrissey

Of course, it is a challenge to the working man, who has suffered most as a result of these strikes. Who were the people who had to queue up in the snow and in the east winds for a stone of wet turf to carry them over from 12 midday on Saturday until Monday morning? The very poor. The greatest menace to the working man himself, and certainly the greatest menace to the trade unions of this country, are the soreheads, the disgruntled and irresponsible people who are fomenting and starting these so-called lightning and unofficial strikes. If the Minister has not power to deal with them are we to take it that the community is to sit back for this year and next year and allow certain people in this country who are working towards a certain definite plan behind stooges—to the Minister's knowledge behind stooges—to hold the community here to ransom whenever it suits them?

Most people choose their time. Now they are choosing their distance. Their aim is to paralyse something that is absolutely vital to the life of the community. They have been allowed to do that unchallenged either by the Minister, as representing the community, or by the heads of the trade unions which should be protecting, not only their unions, but the members of those unions.

Mr. Davin

To what unions are you referring now?

Mr. D. Morrissey

I am referring to all the legitimate trade unions in this country.

Mr. Davin

They were not involved in these strikes.

Mr. D. Morrissey

I do not care whether they were or were not involved. I am saying that these strikes are a challenge to them. I am not saying they were involved in them. The Deputy knows quite well that what I say is a fact. The Deputy knows quite well that if such situations are tolerated then no trade union is safe in this country. Why should employers negotiate with trade unions in regard to certain people unless the trade unions are going honourably to adhere to any agreements arrived at between the employers and the trade unions? The present situation is a menace. It has had the result of reducing both the fuel and the food available here for our community. Because of that the Minister has been compelled to go to Peru for 24,000 tons of sugar and the taxpayer will have to pay through the nose for it, in one form or another.

I challenge the Minister, when replying to this debate, to give to this House and to the country his views on this matter. The Minister cannot escape his obligation in this matter. It is too serious. Neither do I want any quibbling about it. I do not propose to say any more at the moment on this subject. I have thrown down a challenge here and it is for the Minister and those in this House who can speak with authority for the legitimate trade unions in this country to take the matter up from there.

Mr. Davin

There is only one trade union involved.

Mr. D. Morrissey

There is more than one legitimate trade union in this country.

Mr. Davin

There is only one involved and you know it.

Mr. D. Morrissey

I know a good deal. If I did not I should not now be talking in my present strain. The Deputy has at least as much knowledge of the matter as I have. The Minister has as much knowledge as both of us put together or, if he has not, he ought to. The Minister, more clearly than I or any other member of this House, must know the consequences which have flowed from these things. He must know that the consequences are growing and that the situation is becoming more and more organised because they choose their time when to deliver the punch and the punch is always aimed at the most vital part.

With regard to other matters affecting the food and fuel situation, I recognise quite clearly the difficulties that exist in connection with the supply of adequate and sufficient transport in this country. What I quarrel with is the intolerable muddle that has been made in utilising to the full the transport which we have available. I know that immense quantities of food and fuel have been lost to the community in the past because of the mismanagement of the existing transport in the country. I want to tell the Minister now that even if he were to succeed in reaching the target set for the production of turf—even if he were to succeed—unless there is a complete and radical change in the present method of dealing with transport not one half of the turf cut will be taken out of the bogs this year.

If the farmers of this country succeed —and it will be a miracle if they do and will be due entirely to their own progressive effort and their own hard work—in producing anything like the target set for wheat in this year, most of that wheat—perhaps it is an exaggeration to say most of it, but a considerable quantity at any rate— will be lost or else sent to the mills in a damaged condition because of lack of transport at the critical time, unless there is some revolutionary change this year. The Government has never yet faced up to the fact that half the motor lorries in this country are running half their time empty. We have never faced up to the fact that at the most critical period of the year we have fuel, wheat and beet all coming together awaiting transport and demanding transport. Let me give the House just one example of the muddle. I think myself that "muddle" is almost too mild a word to use in describing the situation. I got a letter on either the 3rd or the 4th of this month from a seed merchant, a constituent of Deputy Davin's, who happens to be an acquaintance of mine and who is living on the borders of Tipperary. He said in the letter:—

"You know that I am in the seed and fertiliser business; that I have two lorries; that I am four or five miles from the nearest railway station; that my seed wheat and fertilisers are sent to me from Dublin; that I use my two lorries to collect that seed wheat and those fertilisers at the railway station, distributing them from the station direct to the farmers."

Now, mark you this—on the 3rd of April of this year when every hour, much less day, was absolutely vital, he said:—

"I have not yet received my coupons for my basic petrol allowance for the month of April for my two lorries and when I rang up the Department yesterday I was informed that the coupons were still with the printers and that they could not guarantee them for seven or ten days."

This man is living in one of the most intensive tillage districts in this country. This year, when every hour counts, this man has two lorries and six men standing idle in his yard and dozens of farmers around him waiting for seed and fertilisers, and the coupons still with the printers.

Mr. Dillon

The printers are no longer allowed to work overtime.

Mr. D. Morrissey

Whether they are or not, every Deputy in this House, including Deputy Davin and myself, got his coupons for his private car last month.

Mr. Davin

I never had a car. I could not drive one.

Mr. D. Morrissey

Then it is time the Deputy got a car. Whether the Deputy cannot drive one or will not buy one I do not know. But that is the type of thing we get from the Department. There is no excuse for it. There cannot be any excuse for it.

We have already in this House debated the question at some length of fuel supplies and I am not again going to go into all the efforts that were not made to get fuel from outside sources when fuel was available from outside sources and when it would have been much less trouble to secure it.

It is quite clear that the Minister realises the gravity of the position now and he was certainly at some pains to present a clear and full picture of the situation, as he saw it, to the House and to the country. He did not, I am glad to say, indulge in the type of speech to which we have often listened in this House in the past 14 or 15 years promising us "jam to-morrow". The Minister did not promise us very much jam to-morrow, but he did not get away entirely from that psychological approach to the situation. In his statement he said that he was himself looking forward to the time when we would be complete masters of our own rate of progress in relation to industry in this country. What is the meaning of a statement like that? Does not the Minister know that neither we nor any other country on the face of this earth are ever going to become complete masters of their own rate of progress?

Does the Minister know that we are more dependent to-day upon circumstances outside our control than ever we were? Does not the Minister know that circumstances completely beyond our control will determine our whole economic position and our standard of living? Does not the Minister know that whether our industries are to survive and flourish or to decay and perish depends very largely, if not entirely, on circumstances outside our control? Does not the Minister know that certainly by far the greater concentration in this country should be on stepping up production in agriculture, that it is through agriculture that we must get what will sustain our people and, with the least dependence upon outside sources, something to export?

I know, Sir, that many Deputies want to speak on this Estimate. Even I could speak for nearly as long as the Minister if I were to go over the various points. I am merely touching on some, knowing that the others will be more fully dealt with and expanded by other speakers.

There is one other major matter that I want to deal with, that is, the employment situation in this country. The Minister said very little about it. Has it struck anybody—has it struck the Minister—that it is remarkable that, notwithstanding all the changes in conditions in this country and in the world, we clock up every year, comparing week for week, to within a few hundred, the same number of unemployed as we had the year before? I was struck with amazement when I started comparing our registered unemployed one year with another. I compared one week of this year with the corresponding week last year. I found that there was a difference of less than 200. The figures were 70,000 odd and 70,000 odd.

It is the one thing that has remained steady in this country during the whole of the war and since the war ended. Has the Minister done anything about it? Does the Minister know if that is a real figure? If we have 70,000 persons unemployed in this country, why have we 70,000 unemployed? I said here 12 months ago, and I want to repeat it now, that without the slightest trouble every able-bodied man and woman in this country could be put into useful work to-morrow morning. There is not a shadow of doubt about that. Why are they kept lining up at the labour exchanges when the excuse we are offered for the lack of production in many phases of our national activity is lack of labour? It is an amazing thing that, notwithstanding all the bog developments, the increased tillage, and the increased housing activities the Minister tells us about, notwithstanding 260,000 emigrants, we still have the hard core of 70,000 unemployed. There is something there to be investigated and cleared up and it ought to be done, in the interests both of the 70,000 and the rest of the community. That has not been tackled. It ought to be tackled. I am not satisfied—let me say this quite bluntly and frankly—that there are 70,000 genuine unemployed. I know that some of them were brought there because machinery was introduced by the Government opposite dealing with the unemployed. It was introduced, not for economic reasons, but for purely political reasons, and that old man is still hanging around their necks and they do not know how they are going to get rid of him.

There are just a couple of items here in the Estimate that I want to refer to and about which I would like a little information. In regard to sub-head K— Health Embarkation Certificates—the sum required for medical services, etc., in connection with the issue of health embarkation certificates is £12,000. Am I right in assuming that that £12,000 is paid out to medical officers for examining and certifying our citizens leaving this country before they will be admitted into the countries to which they are going because, if I am, I would like to know what steps, if any, have been taken, or are being taken, or will be taken, to ensure that similar certificates will be carried by the people who are coming into this country? I do not want to go any further into that at the moment.

Perhaps the Minister will be good enough also to explain under sub-head N—provision for the recoupment of losses incurred by local authorities —the reduction from last year from £110,000 to £50,000. I had a note with regard to sub-head P (1) but, in view of what the Minister has stated regarding the legislation which he proposes to introduce soon, I will leave that over and we can have, perhaps, a fuller explanation and closer examination of that on the Bill.

While I am not surprised at the economic situation disclosed in the Minister's statement, I am very perturbed about it. I think this House and this nation has reason to be uneasy. I think there is something very seriously wrong when we find grave shortages in supplies, not only of commodities for which we are dependent upon outside sources, but of practically all supplies which we produce, or should produce. The Minister stated here that he had been informed by the Minister for Agriculture that he estimated the production of butter would be such as to enable us to have a 6-oz. ration per head for part of the year and a 4-oz. ration for the remainder of the year. I wish I could be as optimistic as the two Ministers. I wish there were any remote chance of that being the case. I am afraid there is not. It is true, the Minister did not mention those figures as more than targets or hopes but when he talks about the production of butter being such in the coming year as to enable him to give that ration, I am afraid he is only raising hopes in the minds of the people that cannot be realised.

When the Minister talks about the production of, I think, 650,000 tons or 800,000 tons of turf—I forget the exact figure—by county councils for Fuel Importers, Limited, I think, again, he is basing an estimate or building hopes on something which it would require a miracle to bring about. Every year through the county councils we go on producing turf by hand. It is not merely a matter of the weather affecting production but we are facing this fact very naturally that for the past six or seven years we have been exploiting the easiest, the most easily worked and the most accessible bogs in this country. The bogs we have to face this year are very difficult to work and develop and are perhaps more difficult to drain than the bogs we have worked in the previous years. The Minister, I am sure, knows that as well as I do. Those are factors which ought to be taken into consideration and I would like to hear the Minister tell the House that he is not going to leave the people of this country entirely dependent on that estimate. I would be entirely against the indiscriminate felling of trees in this country. I would be entirely against it, but there is sufficient useless and waste timber in this country to provide a very substantial amount of firing, not only for the coming year but for many years to come. Deputies who come from rural areas will know that one of the causes of flooding in this country is trees and bushes and so on growing along the banks of rivers. Perhaps this is more of a reflection on the local community than on anybody else but it is a fact that in the case of one river in my own constituency there are many dead trees lying in and across it and they help to flood the land all around. That timber would provide firing for a town for a whole winter. I am sure that that is true of many other parts of the country as well.

The Minister in so far as he can, side by side with the maximum effort to produce the greatest amount of turf, is just taking the ordinary precautions to build up over this summer. I know it is not the most suitable time for cutting timber. I know that timber cut from now on to October will not be the best for burning but it is vital, in my opinion, that a big reserve of timber should be built up in the large centres of population. Otherwise I am afraid that the situation next winter will be infinitely worse—and that is, God knows, bad enough—infinitely worse than it was in the winter just past.

Mr. Anthony

I only want to deal with two matters which come under the general management of the Minister for Industry and Commerce. I would like to get from the Minister some explanation which we have not got in Cork City at any rate in relation to the diversion of a large cargo of coal from Cork to Dublin. The Minister must be aware, of course, that the Cork Harbour Commissioners asked for an interview with him in order that they could get from him some explanation as to why——

Mr. Lemass

The coal is now held up by a strike of the seamen on the Greek ships.

Mr. Anthony

You can say that, but there was no strike by the dockers or the seamen in Cork City at any rate. Somewhere about the 9th or the 10th of last month at a meeting of the Cork Harbour Commissioners it was decided to ask for this interview with the Minister in order to get some explanation from him. The Minister refused to see them but the Manager of the Cork Harbour Commissioners addressed a long letter to the Minister pointing out the relevant facts of the case and asking for some explanation. Certainly a halted and very vague excuse for the diversion of that cargo of coal came from the Minister's Department. It was the usual document full of officialese, to coin a phrase if you like, and did not satisfy the citizens of Cork any more than it satisfied the merchants who paid for the coal. The Minister must know that a number of these merchants, including the firm of Sheehan and Sullivan of Cork, got together and agreed to take a certain quantity of this coal. The firm of Sheehan and Sullivan was nominated by the importers at any rate to be the consignee. Is not that true?

Mr. Lemass

I will answer the Deputy by saying this: On the list of cargoes licensed by the American authorities the name of the firm the Deputy mentions does not appear as a consignee of any cargo.

Mr. Anthony

I will accept the Minister's word, but my information is that these southern merchants decided on one person or firm to accept this coal on their behalf and that firm, I understand, was the firm of Sheehan and Sullivan. He was not a direct importer but he was to act as agent for the others. At any rate, the coal did not go to Cork but when it did come, according to the public report which has not been denied, it meant an increase of at least 23/- a ton. The statement is also made that the Dublin merchants changed the price from 74/- to 84/- per ton. The Dublin merchants who were sending the coal to Cork——

Mr. McGrath

You are referring to a different matter altogether.

Mr. Lemass

Indeed he is.

Mr. Anthony

I am talking about what occurred and it is published here in the Cork paper of Thursday, March 20th, 1947.

Mr. McGrath

Are you referring to American coal?

Mr. Anthony

I am referring to imported coal. Do you know the meaning of imported? I-m-p-o-r-t-e-d. I hope you understand that. Now the Dublin merchants received that coal. They wanted to charge 84/- per ton for it with the result that Cork merchants had to accept that coal at 10/- more and had no profit. That is the statement made. I want the Minister to have it contradicted or otherwise. I will just quote those two reports. Considerable uneasiness has been created in the City of Cork in relation to the whole position. I would like the Minister to clarify the position when he is replying and let us have the true facts of the case. I agree that there are two sides to the story, but two or three conflicting statements have been made and we want to know the truth and we want it from the Minister.

We had a letter from the Minister's Department which, of course, gives the reason for the diversion from the port. When the Department gives a reason for the diversion, we will have to agree that the word "diversion" should stand, notwithstanding interruptions. Irish Coal Importers, Limited, according to the statement from the Minister's Department, considered that the most economical way of distributing the coal would be to import 11,000 tons at Dublin and 6,000 tons at Cork. It was not possible to get ships to fit the cargo to these sizes and subsequently 9,400 tons came to Dublin, and a cargo of 7,600 tons was fixed for Cork. I want to know if, by private enterprise, any citizen of Cork is able to get a cargo of coal or flour, will he be interfered with? If he can get coal from the United States or Britain, if he can get flour from Britain or from America, if he can get wheat from the United States or from any other country, will he be prohibited from so doing by the Minister or his Department?

Mr. Lemass

Coal and flour additional to what we get anyhow.

Mr. Anthony

I want to have that made quite clear.

Mr. Lemass

It is quite clear.

Mr. Anthony

Supposing our people have the initiative, which the Minister or his Department may not have, to look for the flour and coal, will the Minister or his Department impound that coal or flour off the Irish coast? I know it was done before. It was done in connection with paper, at any rate. Private enterprise succeeded in getting paper on one occasion and, after the lapse of months, when the ship bringing that paper at the expense of at least one newspaper proprietor arrived, it was diverted to Dublin and the paper was put into the common pool. That was one slap in the face at private enterprise. I do not want to labour that matter at any length.

Deputy Morrissey referred to lightning strikes. I would like to have the opinion of every Deputy here, who is or has been a member of a trade union, on this very important and rather tragic feature in the industrial life of this country. The principle underlying the trade union movement, which has been accepted by employers and workers alike, is the principle of collective bargaining. Collective bargaining has been carried on over a very long period of years, in some cases over a period of 100 years and in other cases for a lesser period. Collective bargaining, through the agency of representatives of trade unions on the one hand and of employers on the other hand, has served a very useful purpose. It has resulted in many improvements in the lot of the ordinary workers. It has resulted in a better feeling being created between employer and employee. We have seen that movement developing from very small beginnings, from a time when it was regarded as a badge of something amounting to serfdom to be a member of a trade union. In recent years you find that the movement has developed to such an extent that many of the professions have the strongest trade unions in the world.

In this country we have suffered from what are commonly known as lightning strikes. These are unofficial strikes and I would not like to believe that the trade union movement would be made suffer because of this revolt against discipline and against trade unionism. I and every sane man who has had any connection with trade unions would regard the lightning strike as a negation of all trade unionism stood and stands for. Many of those persons who have indulged in the lightning strike are persons who only recently came into the trade union movement. I have wondered what the trade unions involved could or should have done. I do not hesitate to say that the first thing they should have done was to expel those persons who are a menace, and will continue to be a menace, to the trade union movement in this country.

It may be said by some that because it was unofficial and because they repudiated their own officials and got out of hand, it might be a very dangerous thing to expel those persons who indulged in the lightning strike. In my view that is a very cowardly attitude to take up. I am not going to suggest that any Czarist methods should be adopted, but I hope a definite lead will come from the trade unions themselves. I am a member of a trade union and I am proud of it. I feel it is up to the leaders of this movement to condemn lightning strikes right, left and centre—actively to condemn them by the one and only punishment that will succeed, namely, expulsion.

I sincerely hope that those who regard these lightning strikes as a danger and a menace, not alone to some of the wealthier classes in this country, but to the very poorest of the poor who suffer most because of these lightning strikes, will make themselves heard. We heard a lot from the Minister, but he glossed over certain matters in relation to lightning strikes. I think the matter is of such grave importance that it demands from the Minister an amplification of what he stated. I think it was Deputy Davin who very properly interrupted and said it was confined perhaps to one or two trade unions. I would not like it to go abroad that there is any sympathy whatsoever on the part of trade unionists with those persons who held up the whole country to ransom and left many poor people without sugar and other necessaries of life.

I would like to hear the Minister, who is a responsible Minister, one who has shown a good deal of determination and pluck, expressing his idea of what national social service should be like. I do not want to labour that at any great length. I am aware that anything said by me, and perhaps by others, will be misrepresented, will be possibly misunderstood and will be twisted in order to meet some political or Party end, but thank God I do not care two hoots about that. I sincerely hope that the members of this House who are or have been members of genuine trade unions will make themselves vocal in a matter which is of such serious importance to the people of the country.

Mr. Davin

I accept very fully that Deputy Morrissey and Deputy Anthony have expressed quite sincerely their attitude towards lightning strikes. As one who is a member of a trade union —I was one of the founders of it close on 40 years ago—I may say that the members of my organisation and the leaders of it never advocated or took part in lightning strikes for purely industrial purposes. I was involved directly and actively in three strikes during my membership of that trade union. I was involved in the famous anti-conscription strike in which practically the whole community took part. It was led by the labour movement at that particular period. I was involved, and indeed was one of the twelve signatories, as Deputy Anthony knows, in the lightning strike called at short notice for the release of the Mountjoy hunger strikers, and I was involved in a very short strike for the recognition of the union, of which I am very proud to be a member, about 40 years ago. I do not think lightning strikes for the purpose of achieving any object against an employer serve any useful purpose. I never advocated it and, whenever I could prevent such lightning strikes, even in recent times, I have endeavoured to use my influence in that direction.

I do not want to go into the matters to which Deputy Morrissey referred but he rather seemed to indicate by direct reference to the members of this group that the members of this group had some responsibility for the lightning strike which took place in the sugar beet factories. I deny that. It is well known to Deputy O'Leary that the overwhelming majority of the sugar beet workers are members of the Irish Transport Workers' Union and, if anybody would like to explain the background of that particular strike to the Minister or anybody else, Deputy O'Leary and his colleagues could do that better than anybody else. I have good reason for not going into that matter as it is only a member of the Irish Transport Workers' Union who can understand the whole background.

Mr. O'Leary

Are you blaming the transport union for it?

Mr. Davin

I would prefer if the Deputy would answer Deputy Morrissey.

Mr. O'Leary

I should like to know what you are driving at.

Mr. Davin

It is strange that Deputy Morrissey should raise that matter just at a time when we read in the newspapers that 60 turf workers employed by the Tipperary County Council in the Killenaule area are on strike against the action of the council in reducing the rates for piece-work from 8d. per cubic yard to 6d. per cubic yard. Before I should repudiate these people, I should like to know the background of that strike. If the county council were justified in paying 8d. per cubic yard to their turf workers last year, I should like to hear some very good reasons as to why that figure should be reduced this year to 6d. because the cost of living has increased appreciably since last year. Deputy Morrissey when he speaks again can give us something of the background of that particular strike. So far as I can judge, these lightning strikes were directed more against leaders or particular individuals than against anybody else. They are certainly to be regretted and, as far as I am concerned, I shall exercise any little influence I possess in my own constituency to prevent them.

The Minister gave us a very elaborate and lengthy exposition of the activities of the huge Department over which he presides in connection with most of the matters with which Deputies are concerned. One thing I like about the Department of Industry and Commerce is the energy of the Minister. I certainly do not agree with many aspects of Ministerial policy but I have to admit that the Minister is an extremely hard worker and that he is extremely well informed in regard to the detailed activities of the biggest and most difficult Department under the control of the Government of this country. I must also say that he freely gives to members of the House in answers to Parliamentary questions any information which they desire and, generally speaking, satisfactory answers.

Apart from the particular matter with which I am concerned in the amendment which stands in my name, I should like to deal with a couple of other matters referred to by the Minister or matters affecting the administration of the Department. The Minister in his explanatory statement referred to his recent decision, at the request of Córas Iompair Éireann, to increase rates and fares. He has admitted, by the public advertisement signed by the secretary of his Department, and here to-day, that he has sanctioned a proposal of Córas Iompair Éireann for that purpose. It is to be deeply regretted that the Minister has decided to take such action, especially in view of his own action last year at the request of the same company, in sanctioning a reduction in fares and rates. The Minister is aware that since the establishment of Córas Iompair Éireann a huge number of what are known as exceptional rates have been wiped out, exceptional rates that gave a fillip to the development of industry and agriculture and which provided a cheap means of transit for raw material or for bulk traffic of a kind that could not bear heavy rates. I cannot understand for the life of me why the Minister sanctioned these recent increases. I do not understand either the language of the advertisement which appeared in the daily papers last week without any signature and which should have been signed by some executive officer. They indicated the very peculiar nature of these increases by mentioning an increase of 20 per cent. "or thereabouts". I never heard the word "thereabouts" associated with such a proposal before and I should like to know the meaning of the insertion of the word "thereabouts".

I dare say it can be covered up by the advertisement which appeared in a more recent issue of the papers signed by Mr. John Leydon, Secretary of the Department. Mr. Leydon says in that advertisement that they had received a request from Córas Iompair Éireann for an Order to alter the maximum railway charges and that public notice of the application was given by the company on the 6th and 13th March. He then goes on to say:

"Having considered all representations made to him in the matter by interested parties, the Minister on the 11th April, 1947, made an Order entitled the Transport Act, 1944, (Alteration of Maximum Railway Charges) Order, 1947. This Order authorises an increase in the maximum railway charges of the company. The Order will be published in due course and copies may be obtained from the Government Publications Sales Office, 3 College Street, Dublin."

I wonder when. I know it is very difficult to get a copy of these Orders long after they are supposed to be available. However, I think these proposed increases in railway charges and passenger rates are going to have a considerable effect on the community as a whole. They are going to increase the cost of living and to help to reduce the price paid to the farmer, for instance, for live stock. This 20 per cent. increase in charges for the transport of the raw material for agriculture is not justified. Is there any country in the world where the Government has any control over the transport system, where that transport system does not give preferential rates for the carriage of raw materials for agriculture or for industry and, by so doing, keeps down the cost of living? The charges are to be raised in this country and they will continue at this high level until such a time as the railway services are restored to normal conditions.

I wonder how many Deputies realise the cost of carrying live stock by road as compared with carriage by rail. I have a case here under my notice in the last few days, which will disclose to the average Deputy the ridiculously high charges made by Córas Iompair Eireann for carrying live stock by road as against rail, and there is to be an increase of 20 per cent. in these charges, both by rail and road. In this case, 26 cattle were put into two road service lorries in Ennis a few days ago—13 in each lorry. What was the cost of carrying these cattle by road? It was £33 for 26 small beasts which could have been carried in less than two railway wagons at a charge of £6 17s. 4d. per wagon from Ennis to North Wall as against £16 7s. 6d. per lorry by road. In addition, the invoice has the ridiculous remark: "Plus additional charge of 7/6 per half-hour for delays involved in loading and unloading." I wonder will the farmer Deputies or any farmers' organisation they know of say they made any protest against the proposed increase, apart altogether from the fact that the rates at present are excessive and an imposition on the farmers.

The Minister now proposes to increase by 20 per cent. the existing rates for carriage by road and rail when he knows perfectly well—if he does not the Minister for Agriculture will tell him, and, if neither of them knows it, the farmers will tell them—that this additional impost will mean a lower price for the farmer's cattle. At the same time, the same Minister recently authorised an increase in the price of fresh meat, so that we have these two things practically at the same time—a reduction in the price to the farmer for his cattle and an increase in the price to be paid in future by the average consumer of fresh meat. It is an upside-down policy, and one which clearly reveals itself as a policy leading to increase in the cost of living and further impositions on the producer in favour of the middle-man, even if the middle-man in this case includes Córas Iompair Éireann.

I could quote many other glaring cases of excessive rates, and I want to know from Deputies if they propose to sit down and allow Córas Iompair Éireann, with the consent of the Minister, to close down branch railway lines, and perhaps destroy the main railway lines because the branch lines are the feeders of the main lines, and, in the end, finish off the railways for the propping up of which the famous Transport Act of 1944 was introduced and passed. I should like to know whether any organisation claiming to represent the producers—live-stock traders' organisations, beet growers' organisations or any other farmers' organisations of a non-political character—made any representations to the Minister in respect of this proposed 20 per cent. increase.

I want to know also, arising out of this whole exposure of transport policy, who will pay for the new concrete roads which will have to be laid down, if the branch railway lines are to be closed. Is it the local ratepayer who will be called on to pay increased rates at a time when the rates are already excessive? Many of these branch lines—a number of them in my constituency are involved—go through bog areas where it would be very difficult to lay a good foundation for a road and if new first-class roads have to be made the House should be informed as to who will find the money for them.

The Minister in his statement dealing with the transport position—a position which I readily recognise is made doubly difficulty by reasons which neither the Minister nor the directors of the railway company are responsible, namely, the shortage of coal—said that he had relaxed a good many of the pre-emergency conditions. I do not know how far he has gone in that respect, but it is apparently possible now for Córas Iompair Eireann, according to what we read in the reports of court cases in the last few days, without being involved in a prosecution, to compel a motor-lorry driver to start work at 1 o'clock in the morning and to continue working without rest until 4 o'clock the following afternoon. I dare say Deputies have read the case decided in the last few days in the High Court, arising out of a charge of manslaughter against a lorry driver employed by Córas Iompair Eireann, in which the lorry driver swore that that was his normal turn of duty. A company is allowed by the Minister to carry that on while under legal obligation to give all its workers an eight-hour day and a rest of eight hours between their working periods. If Córas Iompair Eireann is to be allowed to get away with that kind of activity, what will be the position of ordinary employers in the country who employ motor-lorry drivers and who work perhaps in competition with Córas Iompair Eireann? Has the Minister relaxed his regulations and absolved the company from responsibility in cases of that kind? I hope that such a case will never again be cited to the courts in the course of a defence in a charge of manslaughter involving the death of a citizen. The company apparently can get away with it.

The Minister said that the tourist business, from the point of view of value, is second only to the agricultural industry. I have always supported the development of the tourist industry, and under normal circumstances I would continue to do so, but there are a large number of people in the country—and I as an individual am one of them—who share the view that we should go very carefully in existing circumstances, and especially in view of the shortage of supplies. The Minister went so far as to say—and while I should like to accept his word, I am afraid he is not fully informed—that the invasion of tourists from either Great Britain or Northern Ireland does not affect the amount of butter and other commodities available for consumption by the ordinary citizen here. I am sorry to say that, from what I know personally, that is not correct.

The Minister has probably read the report of Córas Iompair Éireann for last year and the speech made by the chairman of that company at its recent meeting in the Gresham Hotel, and I expect he will have noticed that one of the most profitable sections of that company, the only really profitable section, the hotel section, practically doubled its revenue last year by reason of the fact that their hotels for a considerable period of the year were filled to capacity by tourists or people who came to live permanently in them. I am not one of those who will believe that the increased numbers of people who stayed in the hotels, the splendid hotels run by Córas Iompair Éireann, were eating dry bread during their stay there. That is the meaning of what the Minister said—there was no increased allocation of butter or other consumable commodity for the increased number of people who stayed in these and other hotels in seaside places. I know for a fact, and I have had complaints, that the residents of certain seaside resorts around our south coast cannot get the quantity of consumable goods they previously got because of the increased allowances given to some of the private and public hotels there. The hotels in this city and country are filled, and, if any additional room is available, more people will be staying there. I know that from contacts with people from across-Channel.

I do not want to discourage the development of the tourist industry, but I believe that we should go carefully and not impose suffering on our own people by reason of further reductions in their rations as a result of allowing too many people to come in here. I have no strong objection to the British people coming in here at present, or during normal times, so long as there is some restriction for the reason I have given, because the British people, generally speaking, during the past five or six years, provided employment for over 250,000 of our citizens, and I think we owe them something for that.

I do not think that we owe much— I am sorry to have to say it—to our northern fellow-countrymen who come down here to eat our butter, consume other commodities in short supply and then refuse residence permits to people from the Twenty-Six Counties to premit them to continue in their jobs. I do not desire to develop that but, if I were giving a preference to any tourists and giving them a share of what we have to hand round, I should, for the reasons given, give that preference to the British tourists as against the bigoted North of Ireland people who want to fire our people out of their jobs in the Six Counties and who refuse to give them residence permits. They come down here prepared to consume our eggs, bacon and butter and to buy our clothes with coupons which they purchase from the poor people around Amiens Street station. If I thought that, by giving them a little bit of what we would normally require for ourselves, it would remove the infamous Border, I should be prepared to do with a bit less myself but I have my doubts about the effect of that.

The Minister referred to the future of Irish Shipping, Limited, and the grants given to harbour boards. There was a question on the Order Paper to-day by Deputy Corish dealing with a matter which I was asked to refer to and about which Deputy Anthony and others were, I think, approached. It is not a matter of major importance but I should like to bring it to the notice of the Minister. Deputy Corish asked the Minister to-day whether officers and men who served with Irish Shipping, Limited, during the emergency, are entitled, when being considered for positions under the Government and under harbour authorities, to have such service taken into account for the purpose of having added years of service credited to them, or to other forms of priority; and, if not, whether he will state on what grounds their service is distinguished, to their detriment, from that of officers and men who served in the marine service during the emergency.

The Minister gave a curious reply. He stated:—

"Certain concessions in the filling of posts in the service of the State and of local authorities and harbour authorities have been granted to men on demobilisation from the Defence Forces as a means of assisting them to civilian employment. More limited concessions have been made to men who are in the auxiliary defence services who gave their time voluntarily during the emergency. Concessions of this type have not been granted to officers and men who served with Irish Shipping, Ltd., or otherwise with the merchant marine during the emergency. These men performed a valuable duty in hazardous conditions but the majority of them were already in seafaring occupations and the opportunity for continuing employment in the calling of their choice has been improved by the wartime development of the Irish merchant marine."

That may be all right so far as it goes but I do not think it is fair that a number of Irish citizens who served under hazardous conditions at sea for a minimum period of four years should be deprived of any preference when seeking positions as harbour masters or in the pilotage service. If it is fair, as I assume it is, that Irishmen who served in the marine service, inside what is known as the three-mile limit, during the emergency should be given a preference by the Local Appointments Commissioners or the Civil Service Commissioners, surely the officers and men of Irish Shipping, who risked their lives every day they went outside the three-mile limit, are entitled to some preference when seeking positions under harbour authorities or in the service of the State. That would be giving them only what was always given in the past. The posts of harbour masters and pilot officers were always given to men who had long service at sea and who had tickets as first or second officers or as captains. Officers and men who served in Irish Shipping during the period of the emergency should, at least, get the consideration given to men who served the State inside the three-mile limit in what is known as the marine service.

I put that proposition to the Minister on behalf of men who took terrible risks during the emergency. I know one case in which a man went down at sea. God saved his life and he applied for a position under a harbour authority not long ago. He stated his age and claimed credit, as he thought he was entitled to do, for service in Irish Shipping, Limited, during the emergency. He was told by the secretary of the Civil Service Commission that it was not the policy of the Government to give preference of any kind for service in Irish Shipping, Limited. I know that a man who served in the marine service, inside the three-mile limit, received credit by way of added years when he made application for a similar position. One is at least as much entitled to preference as the other. That is the case I am making to the Minister and I hope he will give it favourable consideration and, if necessary, put it to the Government so as to have the present unfair position rectified.

I put down this motion mainly for the purpose of inviting the Minister to state whether the Government propose to continue the policy of turf production and turf distribution in the same way as it is being carried on.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputies may not be aware that the motion to which the Deputy refers, which is on the Order Paper, proposes that the Estimate be reduced by £10 in respect of sub-head M.

Mr. Davin

I should like to know whether it is proposed to continue turf production and distribution under the present system. I suggest that it is all wrong for a Government which has to take on this difficult job to have it carried out by three or four different parties. We have Bord na Móna directly responsible for the production of turf in the turf camps at Clonsast and elsewhere. According to the Minister, the county councils are expected this year to produce 600,000 tons of turf in the limited time at their disposal. If the people are to get good value for the huge amount which is involved in the present policy of turf production, production by the county councils should be under the same central system of control as the production of turf in the camps by Bord na Móna. In other words, Bord na Móna, as the responsible Government body, should be in complete control and have effective supervision over the turf produced in the county council bogs as it has in the other bogs under its control.

This system of production of turf by county councils was really brought into operation at exceptionally short notice, when we were faced with an emergency that was never foreseen. It has been an extremely costly way of producing turf, apart from the fact that it interferes seriously with the job of road maintenance and constructional work carried out in normal times by the county council road workers under the supervision of the county engineers. The engineers in the various county councils and the road workers have enough to do to attend to the job of road maintenance and road construction and they should not be dragged away from their normal occupation at a certain season to produce turf for Fuel Importers Limited. I should like to draw the attention of members to returns given by the Minister for Industry and Commerce some time ago regarding the cost of producing turf by county councils in 1945 as compared with 1946. I should like the Minister to explain to me what was the cause of the excessive cost of production by county councils in 1945 as against the estimated cost for 1946. This is a return supplied by the Minister for Industry and Commerce in answer to a question addressed to him by Deputy Mulcahy on the 19th March, 1947, as given in column 2318 of the Official Debates. The Deputy asked the Minister for Local Government if he would state, in respect of each county council: (i) the total quantity of turf sold by the county council to Fuel Importers Limited; and (ii) the price per ton paid to the county council in respect of (a) the 1945 season crop and (b) the 1946 season crop.

The reply gives a lengthy and very valuable and informative return. I am not going into the whole lot, but will take a typical case to try to point out to the Minister and to Deputies that there is something radically wrong, something to be explained in the difference between the cost of production in 1945 as against 1946. In Kerry, where the turf is very good— I do not know the bogs of Kerry as well as yourself, but I have been in a few of them—in 1945 the price per ton, inclusive of loading and delivery charges to local rail-hoad, by the Kerry County Council was 58/1. That is a ridiculously excessive charge and requires to be explained. They produced or supplied to Fuel Importers, Limited, 31,916 tons at 58/1 in 1945, and in 1946, 36,500 tons at 35/-. In other words, there is a difference between 1945 and 1946 of 23/1 per ton. There is something to be explained there.

Take Offaly or Kildare, which I know produce very hard black turf. In Offaly, the cost in 1945 was 36/3 and in 1946 25/-, showing a reduction of 11/3. There is a very great difference there to be explained. We find 25/- for hard black turf in Offaly, as against 35/- in Kerry. North Tipperary shows the same. I want some explanation about that from the Minister. Is it a question of supervision, or is it a question of the bad quality of the turf? It is not a question of wages, because as far as I know there has been no reduction at all in wages between 1945 and 1946. Was it wastage or depreciation? What is the explanation for the reduced cost in 1946 of 23/1 in the case of the turf produced by the Kerry County Council and in the Offaly area of 11/3, from 36/3 to 25/-? I am suggesting that these figures prove in themselves the case that can be made for the supervision by Bord na Móna, by the central Government authority, of the production of turf in the county council bogs in the same way as it has supervised the production and distribution of turf produced in what is known as the camp bogs.

I also referred briefly on a previous occasion to the bad value—it is bad value, but I am not blaming individuals for that, either engineers or workers— that is being given to the people by the type of turf being produced by some of the county councils. I have seen turf in Galway, Donegal and Kerry brought up here over these long-distance runs and certainly it is the top of the bog compared with the turf I see produced in the Midland counties. At any rate, this is all due to the fact that the county councils were forced to take over this job in a hurry. The engineers were rushed out to find the bog nearest to the road that would cost the least amount in development, instead of making an examination of the bogs in a thorough-going manner and classifying them and getting the turf from the bogs which could produce the best type of black turf and which would be the nearest approach to coal in calorific value. That was not done. I would like to see some of the bogs in the Midland counties closed down, as the type of turf produced is not worth the price the consumer has to pay, apart from the fact that the general taxpayer is paying a very high subsidy to enable the turf to be sold at anything like a reasonable price. It would be far better to close down some of those bogs and open up new and better bogs. At any rate, it would be a considerable saving to the community and to the taxpayer if the production and distribution in the county council bogs was under the same control as that of the camp bogs, that is, the effective supervision of Bord na Móna. I hope that matter will be given careful and, if possible, immediate consideration.

I do not want to go back on what Deputy Morrissey said in relation to lightning strikes in the bogs. Some of these people have been to see me in connection with agitation going on for a long period for the improvement of their wages and conditions of service and I can—and will, if the Minister wishes—produce pay dockets from some of those turf workers, large numbers of whom are in Clonsast and in Edenderry camps, to prove that, for a number of weeks since last November, the net income of a high percentage of them was as low as 5/- a week. I invite the Minister to ask Bord na Móna to furnish him with a return —and they can do it, if they want to— of the number of workers employed in Clonsast, Edenderry and other bog camps who had a net income of less than 10/- a week for the last six months.

With another colleague of mine who is regarded as a reasonable man—more reasonable, probably, than I am—I visited, by arrangement, on notice, a certain turf camp in my constituency last November. We were brought in and allowed to see the food given to the men at the midday meal. I saw nothing radically wrong with the food. It was pretty good and there was a good quantity of it. However, there is no man in this House who, if he saw the conditions under which those men had to sleep, in a disused dormitory of an old workhouse, would stand that for five minutes. Although they came from the western countries, where the conditions of living and sleeping are not ideal, you could not blame them for leaving the place. You found 38 beds in one disused dormitory, and no county medical officer would defend it, if asked to report on it from the medical point of view. I never saw worse conditions anywhere, but I prefer to leave it to a colleague who was there at the time to describe it, and he has had some queer experiences of living conditions in the city.

These people have grievances, but lightning strikes, I admit, are not the way to remedy them. I know for a fact that some of these people had been agitating for an improvement in their wages and working and living conditions for a long time before the strike referred to by Deputy Morrissey took place, the strike which he described as a lightning strike.

Perhaps if he had interviewed some of the members of Bord na Móna, they might be able to convince him that the strike was not of the lightning nature that he seems to think. Personally, I am very glad that an arrangement has been made with organised bodies representing the majority of these workers to set up some kind of local committees which will avoid that type of strike in the future. I hope and believe that such an arrangement will lead to better conditions for the workers, better production and better results both for the taxpayers who have to find this big subsidy, and for the people who have to rely on the workers' production of fuel during the coming years. I am very glad indeed that the principal officials of Bord na Móna now recognise the necessity for having a more harmonious working arrangement with the representatives of the workers.

I should like to raise a question with regard to wages and conditions. I hope the Minister will be able to tell me when he is replying what bodies of men, with any knowledge of working conditions in the bogs of the country, were consulted and what organisation, if any, was consulted before the advertisement which appeared recently in the newspapers was issued inviting persons to apply to Bord na Móna for employment under certain conditions. This was a notice to turf workers that appeared in the Press on the 12th April. The advertisement, in regard to wages, refers to a time rate of 1/2 per hour or 56/- for a 48-hour week paid in respect of any operation which cannot be carried out by piece-work.

It then refers to additional allowances, age limits, conditions for board and lodging and so on. Can I be told what organisation, if any, was consulted by the directors of Bord na Móna before that advertisement was issued? If not, I think that the Government have no right to preach to other employers in the country, to public companies and others, as to how they should carry on business with the representatives of organised workers. This Government claims to be a democratic Government and should set a good example in these matters. The Minister for Industry and Commerce has been encouraging the leaders of industry, manufacturers and others to set up certain machinery to deal with the prevention of strikes and claims on behalf of workers for improved conditions. The Government should give a good example in that respect. Instead, they are giving a bad example, by issuing an advertisement of that sort. I do not accept 56/- a week, or 1/2 an hour, as a reasonable wage, in present circumstances, for the men who are producing fuel for the people of the country. I was scoffed at some years ago for being associated with a demand for a minimum wage of £3 per week for workers. I do not believe that anybody would get up now and say that that would be an excessive wage, especially for a married man living in a village or a town, in view of the present high cost of essential commodities, including boots and clothes for his children.

I can tell the Minister that the private producers of turf in my constituency pay far more to the men that they employ to produce turf for sale to people in the City of Dublin than the Government offered through the terms of this advertisement. That should not be the case. The Minister to-day, in reply to a question addressed to him by Deputy Keyes and myself, gave certain information as to how the subsidy is allocated. He did not give details under different sub-heads. I should like if he would do so when replying on this Vote. If not, then he might be good enough to send me the information later, information which I am entitled to. If we take it that the total cost per ton, including the subsidy paid by the State, is £5, I should like to know what amount of that covers the sum paid to the producer, what amount of it covers the cost of transport, what amount of it covers the cost of distribution, and what amount of it is represented in the subsidy.

There is no use in the Minister getting up and telling me—I am not suggesting that he will do so—that he cannot give me these figures because, according to his information, he has figures under the various sub-heads.

Minister for Education (Mr. Derrig)

Will the Deputy say what adjustment he thinks should be made for the weather conditions?

Mr. Davin

If I had the information that I am seeking I would be in a better position to answer that question. The Minister for Industry and Commerce in his reply to-day said that the loss is simply the difference between the amount realised by Fuel Importers, Limited, and the actual sale price. According to the reply, the Minister has the purchase price; he has the cost of transport, the cost of handling, the figures for shrinkage and he has what he calls the cost of general overhead charges, including the selling expenses. I am anxious to know the cost of transport because it is quite evident there is a racket in connection with the transport of turf from the bogs to the City of Dublin. Not very long ago, I heard Deputy McGilligan in this House refer to a case that came before the courts where a turf haulier, under cross-examination, admitted that he had made £12,000 on a Government turf hauling contract to the Curragh and Dublin. Surely, if a man could make that much money there must be a racket in this turf transport business. I wonder if every turf haulier were brought into court and was put under cross-examination would they all make the same admission? The Deputies know all about that particular case. I am not going to mention the name of the gentleman.

I should like to know, for instance, the amount paid to producers. We should all be concerned about the producer. What is the amount paid to the producer as compared to the person who distributes turf and timber in the City of Dublin? I am told that, in the main, the subsidy goes to those who are engaged in distribution, that practically 25/- per ton goes to those engaged in the transport racket, the crowd that are associated with Fuel Importers, Limited, in the handling and distribution of turf in the city. The producer in many cases gets less than that. If that is so, then this whole system of turf production and distribution is upside down and requires much more careful consideration than it has been getting. For a number of years to come we are facing the position that we will have to rely on our own fuel, on turf and whatever small quantity of coal can be produced here. I hope I am wrong in that, but I believe that it will be a long time before the average householder in this country will get British or any other coal for domestic purpose. If that is going to be the position, we should be more careful about the system of turf production and distribution than we have been in the past. I believe it should be brought under the direction of one central supervising authority.

I listened to the Minister to-day make one alarming statement. He told the House, in reply to a question addressed to him, that it was proposed to sell, by public auction I suppose, the Slieveardagh Mines. The Minister for Industry and Commerce goes round to various functions, to luncheons and dinners given by manufacturers and leaders of industry and commerce. That is his duty, but everywhere he goes he tells those people—he is codding them, of course, those who believe him—how closely tied he is to the policy of private enterprise. This is the same Minister who is responsible for the administration of the Electricity Supply Board, for the administration of Bord na Móna, for the administration of Córas Iompair Éireann and, more recently still, for the administration of Irish Steel. He is now going to re-establish Irish Steel as a State-guaranteed body with all the members of the board appointed by the Government.

On the day that he announces the sale by public auction of the Slieveardagh quarries—under which auction he is selling the mineral resources of this company after their development with the taxpayer's money—to private enterprise here in this House he tells us that after several failures he is going to re-establish Irish Steel, Limited, under the control of the Government. Could anything be more confusing to the public mind than that? It is certainly a revelation to me. I am grateful to the Minister for the lengthy and elaborate exposition he gave the House on the work of his Department from the point of view of administration, but I think the Deputies of the House could only be confused listening to his statement that he is now going to sell the mineral resources of this country to private individuals while at the same time re-establishing Irish Steel under the direct control of the Government. I hope the Minister in his reply will explain to us his reasons for doing this and his reasons for the many public statements he has made as to the Government being so closely allied to a policy of private enterprise, at a time when the Government is controlling the Electricity Supply Board, Córas Iompair Éireann, Bord na Móna, and more recently Irish Steel, Limited.

Mr. Bartley

I am particularly interested in the references made by the Minister to contemplated changes in the distribution of rationed goods. I think it is time something was done in that direction. I am speaking now for an area that does not produce butter. Butter, I think, was one of the commodities mentioned by the Minister. I think places like Connemara and the west coast generally are entitled to some discrimination in the reallocation of this commodity. Butter is in very short supply in Connemara at the present moment and Connemara is an area in which the people have not the same variety of foods that they have in other parts of the country. The principal article of diet is bread and, if they are lucky enough to have butter, that makes the present loaf somewhat more palatable.

With reference to bread rationing, in areas where bread is the principal article of diet there should be some possibility of increasing the present ration in view of experience gained over the last few months. There are certain sections of organised workers, such as those working on turf production for the county councils, who receive an extra ration. I think that that should be extended to all workers who are producing turf, particularly in a place like Connemara where the claim for such discrimination is well grounded. I am satisfied that the present rationing system has caused a real hardship in Connemara. I know that rationing on any other basis than a flat one is difficult of operation but I think in those areas where definite hardship arises some discrimination should be used. Apart from organised workers working for the county council on the production of turf there are other people who are producing turf on their own initiative and they should be given an increased ration. It might be possible to organise them into groups for this purpose and let them administer the additional ration themselves. Recently there was a strike amongst the county council workers in that area and one of the reasons given for the strike was that the workers were unable to work on the ration of bread which they were allowed. That is a rather serious matter in view of the gravity of the fuel situation. It should be possible to withdraw supplies of flour from areas where the full supply is not now availed of and reallocate that to those areas where need arises for it.

Mr. H.M. Dockrell

The Minister covered a very wide field this afternoon and I propose to refer to only one small question in regard to fuel. When the existing fuel emergency arose the Minister cut down the fuel allowance of anthracite to private consumers to the bare minimum necessary to keep heat storage cookers going. Now, when the emergency arose some people were using gas; some people were using electricity, and some were using oil. The number using heat storage cookers in this country is very limited and I think people who use that type of cooker ought to be encouraged because they burn our native anthracite. Everybody knows that if you do not keep the fire going in your heat storage cooker the value for many hours is completely lost.

I think the Minister was perfectly right to reduce fuel consumption as much as possible. But what has happened is that instead of users of anthracite now being supplied with graded fuel—that is fuel graded into a size suitable for their particular installation—they are compelled to take ungraded anthracite. It seems to me rather futile that at a time when fuel is short and transport difficult, as well as at a time when there is grave scarcity of labour, ungraded anthracite should be carted all over the country, distributed out to the users and eventually dumped into the corporation bins because the people to whom it is supplied are unable to use it. The Minister appreciates as well as I do that slates and dirt, mixed with anthracite, will not burn. In my opinion it would have been more honest if he had reduced the allowance even further and supplied the people with suitable material for the installation. I mention this because it seems such a flagrant injustice—and perhaps it is stupidity also—that fuel cannot be graded on the site, before being dispatched to the city. I can compare the conduct of the Minister's Department in supplying such stuff only with the conduct of a milkman who waters the milk. A milkman who waters the milk is prosecuted as an enemy of the community. What is the sense in carting slates and dirt and passing it to the public as part of the anthracite ration on the pretence that an adequate allowance is being made? Certain persons brought the question to the notice of the Department and the Department said that nobody had complained about it. I have heard numerous complaints about it. In my opinion, it is a very shabby way of treating a special class of consumers who are confined to that type of installation for cooking purposes. I leave it to others to comment on other matters contained in the Minister's speech.

Mr. Cogan

Hearing the Minister's introductory statement one feels rather like Oliver Goldsmith felt about the national teacher of whom he said:—

"And still they gazed and still the wonder grew

That one small head could carry all he knew."

It is astonishing how the Minister can keep track of all the various activities over which he has control, the various branches and sub-branches of his Department dealing with industrial development, and all the sections of his Department dealing with the control and distribution of supplies. Of themselves these would be sufficient to tax the energy and intelligence of any Minister but, in addition, the Minister has a whole host of subsidiary public companies over which he must maintain, or is expected to maintain, supervision. One cannot help feeling that some at least of the various sections of the Department or the various companies may completely escape his attention.

Last summer the Minister came into this House and into the Seanad bubbling over with atomic energy and telling us what he is going to do for the development of the tourist industry. He wanted legislation passed hurriedly so as to proceed with the erection of hotels and the development of a large number of tourist centres. He secured legislative power to raise considerable sums of money. He told Parliament that work would be undertaken immediately the 1946 tourist season ended and would be very far advanced by the time the 1947 tourist season opened. So far as I know, nothing has been done in regard to the development of the various sites. I know that very little has been done in my own constituency, at any rate, notwithstanding that a very large sum of money was allocated for Arklow. I do not complain about that because it is possible that work was held up owing to shortages of materials, or for some other reason, but I would like to know if the Minister can assure the House that all the directors and officials of this particular body are working full time, in view of the fact that their activities have been suspended. At least, there is very little public indication of what their activities are.

In the case of many other similar bodies people are receiving substantial aid out of public funds who are giving very little practical work in return. In matters of this kind there should be a thorough investigation to ensure that where grants are made out of public funds to subsidiary companies, there will be work done in return. While I have no love for bureaucracy, I have less for semi-bureaucratic bodies which have all the powers of bureaucracy but are not subject to the same rigid control. Deputies should be on their guard to see that companies, semi-State owned or semi-State controlled, which are aided out of public funds, give a proper return for that assistance.

The Minister has indicated that it is the intention of the Mineral Development Company to dispose of the Slieveardagh collieries. Unlike Deputy Davin, I have no serious objection to that course, provided useful work has been done by this semi-State company and that a fair price is obtained from the purchaser and provided also that the private company which purchases the industry will work it to the best national advantage and will maintain and increase production. The handing over of property developed by the State to private enterprise is not wrong but at least there should be safeguards to ensure that where useful work has been done by the semi-State company, it will not be undone. Obviously, it would be possible in the case of an industry of that kind for a company engaging in similar enterprise to purchase it merely for the purpose of closing it down.

The Minister in the course of his long and comprehensive statement gave a rather general outline of industrial policy in the future. He indicated that while protective tariffs have been to a considerable extent suspended during the emergency it is the intention of the Government to continue protection for Irish industries in the future. I think there will be general agreement that it is right and proper that industries which are suitable to this country and which are officially run should secure a reasonable measure of State protection provided always that every aspect of national economic development is taken into consideration. There is no use in protecting one industry which adds perhaps a small amount to the sum total of our national production when the effect of that protection is to impede or to destroy some other industry which would add considerably more to the sum total of production. That is a matter which has always to be viewed objectively, impartially and independently and for that reason it is utterly wrong to have in this country a system where it is sought to associate industries with one particular Party or other. As long as the idea prevails that an industry is associated with a political Party and that the prestige of the political Party depends upon the maintenance of that industry the Government is never free to weigh the justice of that industry's demand for protection or otherwise. Now, that is a fundamental principle which must be clearly accepted. We must be prepared at all times to support only those industries which are justified by their efficiency, by their output and by their suitability to our country's conditions and to our country's resources. Fundamentally it should be recognised that industries which in some way supply fuel, either for domestic use or for other industries, are of the greatest importance and it is to the development of such industries that first attention should be given. I think that viewing the matter now in the light of experience over the past 25 years it will be admitted that we have not proprogressed as rapidly as we should have in the development of electricity from water power and from other sources and that deficiency must be made good in the shortest possible time.

I have always felt that all our water-power resources—our larger rivers which are being tackled at the moment and even our smaller streams—should be utilised to add to the common pool of electric power. I have frequently in this House suggested that tidal power should also be developed. In this connection I remember reading a short time ago that if tidal power were developed universally it would have the effect of slowing down tides which, in turn, would have the power to prevent the earth from rotating and which also would have the further effect of bringing down the moon to collapse right on top of the earth. I would not like to be responsible for such a series of calamities but I think the question of the development of tidal power is one which should be investigated. I have also always felt that wind power is capable of very substantial extension and development for the purpose of creating electric current, not to be utilised directly but the wind power to be utilised for the purpose of elevating water which in turn would provide electric current. I think that the length and extent of our coast-line, exposure to Atlantic winds and so on, is another sphere of activity which requires to be investigated.

The development of electricity from peat seems to be an ideal proposition. It seems that the conversion of peat into electricity is the ideal way to use peat. At any rate it is less vulnerable if utilised in that way to the profiteer who would like to adulterate it with water, as some Deputies have suggested. I think it will be admitted there is no future in peat development except under intensive mechanical processes and I hope that the methods adopted in other countries, Sweden and Germany, for example, for the utilisation and development of peat will be carefully studied and full advantage taken of the experience gained by these countries. The Minister indicated that it is the intention of the Government to promote as far as possible industrial exports. I think we will never have proper and efficient industrial enterprise in this country until our industrialists are alive to the importance of external markets and endeavour by every means in their power to compete in external markets.

It may be said of course that many of our manufacturing units are so small that they cannot undertake export business in an effective way but I think, here again, that there is scope for co-operation and perhaps even combination amongst the manufacturers. For example, if all the companies engaged in the manufacture of boots and shoes were to co-operate, they would probably be able to turn out some particular type of product which would be suitable to some external market and which would compete effectively in that market. There is a basis for co-operation in such matters because, if each individual boot factory were to seek first to cater for the home market, and then to export their small surplus abroad, that surplus would be so small and their manufacturing plant would be so limited that they would be unable to compete effectively in external markets. The industries which have been very successful in the export trade heretofore were very large industries such as Jacob's and Guinness's.

In general, I think there must be guiding principles in regard to the application of protective tariffs and in this connection I feel that a restriction or quota on imports might be more dangerous than a moderate protective tariff—that is, for example, in connection with the agricultural industry. Agriculture is the industry upon which this nation mainly depends. It is the industry upon which the nation must depend for export and those engaged in it are entitled to the most efficient machinery and implements to assist them in production. If any serious restriction is placed on the imports of machinery for agriculture it must reflect upon the efficiency of the industry. The farmer is entitled to get the most up-to-date equipment available to farmers of other nations and, while it might be possible to compensate the farmer for a small tariff on some imported commodity which he required, he could not under any circumstances be compensated for a restriction, either by quota or in any other form, on the importation of something he urgently requires. That is why I say the farmer must have available every aid to agriculture which farmers in other countries have.

The Minister said that the tourist trade in the future is likely to be second in importance to agriculture. That may be true in the rather distant future; it is not true at the present time. While it may be contended that the best way to export agricultural produce is in the stomachs of the tourists, that is only true in connection with agricultural products of which you have an exportable surplus. Unfortunately, however, during the past year we have been exporting agricultural produce of which we had no surplus, through the tourist trade. That, I think, is the grievance which most people have in regard to this matter. There is no objection to exporting beef, or, perhaps, eggs through the tourist industry, but there is a very serious objection to exporting our limited supplies of butter and bacon in the same way.

It is idle and foolish for the Minister to contend that the tourist trade has not absorbed and is not absorbing a considerable quantity of our butter supplies. Does anyone seriously contend that any first-class hotel in this country has been short of butter or bacon during the past year? While it is true that they may not have an increased ration of those commodities, they have by some means or other been able always to secure supplies. It may be they have secured a very considerable proportion of the supplies of farmers' butter and it may be also that they have resorted to the black market, but they certainly have been able to provide their clients with the best quality of food of every description, food that was in short supply here.

The Minister indicated in connection with rationing for the future that it is his intention to discriminate between counties where creamery butter is produced and counties where farmers concentrate mainly on home-produced butter. I think that would be a very difficult scheme to administer. It would be rather a dangerous one and it would be unfair to a great many areas. I think it would be very hard to define clearly what are the creamery-producing areas and what are the areas which produce only farmers' butter. As a result of such a discrimination between the two types I think very grave injustice would be inflicted upon many towns and many country districts also. The Minister would be well advised to reconsider that matter.

In connection with our bread supplies, the Minister does not hold out any very great hope for the future. He and his Department are open to serious blame for the complacency with which they viewed our wheat and bread supplies over the past year until matters became really serious.

As I mentioned in this House before, I had the experience of visiting the Minister's Department and discussing the importation of flour with an officer of that Department. The one thing that impressed me in that interview was the complacency with which the situation was viewed by that officer. At that time, last September, we, the members of a deputation who waited on that officer, were informed that there was no reason for alarm, that the Department had the situation well in hand, that there was no need for anybody to ask any questions, and that the Department were well able to deal with the situation. At that time a proposition was put up to the Department by a merchant who had secured an offer of flour from America. That merchant secured the offer through personal contact and he asked the assistance of the Department in following up the offer and in securing the importation of that flour. It may be, as the Minister said, that it might not be possible or at least that it would be very difficult to import flour from the United States at that time but, at least, the merchant should have been given encouragement and assistance to go ahead and see how far he could go. Personal contact in regard to supplies is very often more valuable than Government action. We have seen, since that offer of assistance by that merchant was turned down, that the directors of Grain Importers, Limited, have had to go to the United States and other countries and make personal contact because in such matters the personal touch often succeeds where long distance correspondence and cabling frequently result in failure. I think the personal contacts since made by the directors of Grain Importers, Limited, have yielded results.

It is a matter, I think, upon which the Department should be congratulated that supplies of tractor fuel, as far as I can ascertain in some of the busiest districts in the country, are ample, and that farmers during the present sowing season have had no difficulty in obtaining supplies. The same does not apply, however, to kerosene for household use and for people engaged in the poultry industry. In many districts supplies are two or three months behind in regard to delivery. I think that is very unfair. The Minister may say that household requirements must go by the board and that supplies of tractor fuel must take precedence. That is true, but we must remember that in addition to the sowing of crops, there are very many important industries dependent upon kerosene. The poultry industry, which is one of the most important industries in the State and one of the most important branches of agriculture, has been very seriously handicapped during the past few months owing to the impossibility of securing kerosene for incubators.

I think these shortages should not have occured and that there must be some failure on the part of the oil companies to make full use of their transport in carefully attending to all districts. I notice that some outlying rural districts have been completely neglected while districts near more important roadways and centres of distribution have been supplied. I think that is very unfair. I have been told on authority, which I think is reliable, that the oil companies have not been pulling their weight and that there is not the co-operation that there should be between the various rival companies. I do not know how true that is but I have been told it at any rate. Certainly the agricultural industry has suffered very gravely during the past four or five months as a result of the failure to supply farmers with their lawful ration of kerosene. Not only has there been hardship for individual farmers but, I suppose, there will also be a loss to the nation because many poultry keepers, who are station holders under the Department's schemes, have been unable to obtain their proper allocation.

The Minister did not refer at any length to the activities of the Mineral Development Company, apart from coal production and apart from his indication that it was their intention to dispose of one of their collieries. Wicklow is an important source of mineral supplies of various kinds and there has been considerable development during the war period in that county. I am anxious to know if it is the Minister's opinion that that development will continue in the postwar period. I should like to have an indication from him as to whether it is his intention to continue that development under the present company or to dispose of it, piecemeal or otherwise, to private enterprise.

Whatever decision may be taken in this matter, it is essential that no opportunity to develop our mineral deposits to the fullest extent should be lost, because it is on the development of these deposits that we have to depend for other industries. Whatever the future may hold, whatever international arrangements may be made, whether we are to have a protectionist policy in various industrial countries or whether there will be international trading agreements by which protection will to a large extent be suspended, I still believe that there is a future for industrial development here, and it is necessary, not only economically but nationally, that our people should be industrially-minded and that our young people particularly should have an earnest desire to do whatever they possibly can to promote industries, particularly in their own districts.

For this reason, it is essential that education in craftsmanship of every kind should be developed, and the Minister should press for adult education for young people growing up in various arts and crafts and in technical knowledge which would fit them for skilled work in factories. That is most important and most desirable. We must have the most efficient workers and the most up-to-date equipment we can get, and we must have in control of industry men who are honourable and honest and who are not out to profiteer at the expense of the rest of the community. Such a development will, I believe, take place. Industrial development in its early stages here was confined to a large extent to people who had no previous industrial experience or training, but, as time goes on, I believe we will establish in this country an industrial tradition just as there is an industrial tradition in Britain, the United States and other countries. The sons and the descendants of the owners and the managers of industries will grow up in an industrial environment and with an industrial outlook and will in the future tend to make industrial development permanent and efficient.

Mr. McGrath

So much publicity has been given to the coal position in Cork in the local papers that it came as a great surprise to me this evening to find that a man like Deputy Anthony knew so little about it and should be so mixed up in what he said about it, and it might be no harm to give an outline of the position with regard to coal in Cork for the past six weeks or so. About the first week in March, the engineer of the Cork Harbour Board said in his report that they had not sufficient coal to service one liner tender but that they could manage one by taking the bunkers out of a dredger and putting them into a tender. I was appealed to to get in touch with the Department. I did so, and I got back a letter very promptly on Saturday morning stating that arrangements had been made for Cork coal merchants to get supplies of coal for their special permit holders from Dublin. I immediately went to the manager of the harbour board and showed him that letter. He got in touch with the principal coal merchants on the phone in my presence and they asked him to send a copy of the letter to them, stating that they would be holding a meeting on Monday and that they would give us their reply at the harbour board meeting on Monday evening.

The matter of the shortage of coal came up again at the board's meeting on Monday and the chairman said that the Lord Mayor was going to Dublin the following day and that we could safely leave the matter in his hands. I then asked the manager to read the letter I had got from the Department and he did so. I said that I understood we were to get a reply to that letter at that meeting and the Lord Mayor then stood up and said:—

"We, the coal merchants of Cork, held a meeting this morning and none of the merchants at the meeting was able to get coal from Dublin."

I said that if that was the case, although the Department had written to me saying that arrangements had been made, it was my duty to take the matter up, if those arrangements had not been made.

A deputation consisting of the Lord Mayor, the general manager and myself was appointed to go to Dublin. The general manager and myself went to the Department in Dublin and the head of the Department expressed himself as being amazed that the Lord Mayor of Cork should make such a statement. He told us that if the Cork coal merchants were not prepared to handle this coal, and that if we wanted coal, he would have it on rail that evening for us. Some of it was on rail that evening and the Cork coal merchants handled it then.

I contacted the Lord Mayor that night and brought him to the Department the following morning where he was told the same thing and then, for the first time, we heard about profits. He said:—

"Surely you would not expect us to handle it without a profit?"

This was the man who was supposed to have gone to America to look after the country's interests and to get coal. He was told that there was plenty of coal available for special permit holders not alone in Cork but all over the country and that the Department had taken into account practically every ounce of coal available in the country when they sent that letter to me. That is the 74/- and 84/- Deputy Anthony speaks about. That coal had been the property of the merchants in Dublin for a long time—coal they had in stock—and the coal merchants of Dublin had agreed to give this coal out to places which needed it badly during that crisis. That was given enough publicity in Cork to enable Deputy Anthony or anyone else to know all about it.

With regard to the American coal, on that same day, 14th March, the general manager said to the head of the Department:—

"There is a cargo of American coal coming to Cork. Would you not give us a couple of months' allocation?"

He was promptly told that we could put out of our heads any idea that that coal was going to Cork, that it was going to wherever it was most needed at the time. That was on the 14th March, and then it came as a great surprise to the people in Cork, to the Lord Mayor, the general manager of the harbour board and the harbour commissioners when the coal was diverted, when at least three of us knew on 14th March that the coal was not coming to Cork. I think that anyone who read in the papers about the crisis regarding the gas position in Dublin should feel ashamed of their attitude. While speaking like that, I do feel as much as any Corkman that we should get a little greater share of the coal. I am informed that the Minister said more American coal was coming to the country in the near future. I ask the Minister for an assurance that we shall get some of that directly it arrives. I could understand the position regarding the last cargo of coal but, now that we have some kind of guarantee from Great Britain of a weekly supply, I think we should have an assurance that we shall get our share of the coal coming in future from America. That is all I have to say about the coal position, but I want to say something about the coal merchants.

When we were in the Department on the occasion to which I have referred, I produced figures to the head of the Department regarding the distribution of turf. When turf commenced to get scarce in Cork, the merchants did not give the retailers their proper share of what they were getting themselves. Most of the merchants of Cork drew up to 90 per cent. of their quota of turf from the 10th to the end of March. That is to say, they drew 90 per cent. of what they drew for the same period 12 months ago and they gave the retailers as low as 20 per cent. Most of that 20 per cent. had to be drawn by the retailers from the dump in the park while the merchants were getting their own turf off the wagons which were coming in.

I point out this to show the way the poor of Cork were treated. These retailers were resident in the poorer areas of the city. Most of them got their retailers' licences on the recommendation of home assistance officers as being resident in suitable places to supply the poor with turf. Some of them did not get 20 per cent. of the share the merchants were getting, with the result that, in the middle of the period of sleet and snow, you could see the poor people from distant suburbs outside the merchants' stores with their box carts. Many of them had to remain on the quay for a couple of hours at a time. When I inquired into that, I was told that a person could get a ½ cwt. of turf without registration. Bad as that was, it was not so bad for households who had three or four active young persons. They could go to the quays a few times while the individual who had no active person in the house had to do without fuel. The retailers approached Deputy Furlong and myself about this and we attended a meeting. We went to a representative of Fuel Importers, Limited, and asked him to try to arrange a meeting between the coal merchants, ourselves and a couple of retailers. He rang up the chairman and secretary of the Cork coal merchants and they refused to meet us. It is up to the Minister and his Department to take strong action to see that turf is equally distributed amongst the rich and poor, because it is the poor people who deal with those retailers. I strongly appeal to the Minister to take some action on that matter.

As regards petrol supplies and the repeated shortages we had in Cork, I know it was very difficult to overcome the difficulty and that the Minister did his best. I believe, with other Deputies, that the oil companies were not pulling their weight. Quite recently, I went to the Minister about the Haulbowline position and I got a reply saying it was a matter for the Board of Works and that he had referred my letter to them. I strongly appeal to the Minister to try to get the Board of Works to tackle this job, because, so far as I can see, the tendency in Cork seems to be to go over to oil-burning for almost everything. Finally, I renew my appeal to the Minister in connection with future cargoes of American coal.

Mr. Roddy

I should like to refer at the outset to two matters affecting my own constituency. Some time ago, the Minister encouraged harbour authorities to prepare plans for the development of local ports and harbours. Sligo Harbour Authority, in common with other harbour authorities throughout the country, engaged the services of competent engineers to prepare rather elaborate plans for the improvement and development of that harbour. These plans were prepared as far back as October last. The secretary of the harbour board has written on several occasions to the Minister's Department for information as to when those plans are likely to be approved by the Minister's officials. I understand that, so far, he has not received anything in the nature of a satisfactory reply. If these plans were approved of by the Minister's Department and were given effect, they would give an enormous amount of employment in Sligo. I am, perhaps, more concerned about the employment content of the work than about any other aspect of it. I suggest to the Minister that some special steps should be taken to have those plans examined and approved at the earliest possible moment. When they are put into effect, some hundreds of men will be employed in useful work for a period of almost 12 months. I understand that the cost will run into about £100,000.

The next matter with which I want to deal is the importation of Scotch oats. Western farmers have a special predilection for seed oats from Scotland. Whether or not they are justified in their opinion of the germinating powers of Scotch oats I do not know, but they are satisfied from experience that Scotch seed oats gives them better results than seed oats imported from elsewhere. Two enterprising Sligo merchants arranged to import 500 tons of seed oats from a Scottish agent this year. They got a guarantee from the agent that they would be provided with transport facilities. In due course, they applied to the Minister's Department for permission to bring in the oats. They were promptly told that they would not be granted that permission, that already one agency had been established for the importation of seed oats for the farmers of the country.

It is true that oats are being imported through that single agency, but the quantity is not at all adequate to satisfy the needs of the farmers. Every newspaper and every merchant in the seed business received circulars from Scottish merchants and oat exporters this year saying they were prepared to supply certain quantities of seed oats at specified prices. The agency appointed by the Minister was able to purchase only a very small quantity of oats—a quantity which would not meet a hundredth part of the requirements of the farmers. That oats was distributed through the county committees of agriculture. I do not understand why that system of distribution was decided upon. It was not satisfactory and could not possibly be satisfactory. At all events, the oats was obtainable in Scotland and, for some reason of which I am not aware, was not obtained by the agency appointed by the Minister. In view of the fact that these farmers were unable to obtain any change of seed during the war years, the Minister should have made an exception and allowed trustworthy agents or merchants to import seed oats on their own responsibility and distribute such seed to farmers in their different areas. That was not done on this particular occasion, and I suggest that, owing to the fact that these men were refused permission to import that oats, a definite hardship has been inflicted on the farmers of the areas which they supplied normally with seeds for all purposes. The Minister should look into the matter and see that, when a situation of that kind arises next season, he will take a different view and try to facilitate those people to the very best of his ability. It is essential—and the farmers here will bear it out—that there should be a change of seed after all these years. I cannot speak for farmers in other parts of the country, but I know the Western farmers prefer Scotch oats to oats which can be obtained from any other place.

The Minister undoubtedly has given the Dáil a most exhaustive explanation of economic conditions here at the moment. He has held out very little hope for the future and I do not think he was in a position to hold out much hope. It is quite conceivable that the shortages which we have to endure at the moment may continue for an indefinite period. The circumstances which brought about those shortages are outside the Minister's control. In fact, they are outside the control of the Governments of the countries which supplied us with the goods which we need very much at the moment. The circumstances may be due to labour troubles, strikes, exchange difficulties and so on, but, in any event, the world is in such a state of upheaval that we cannot rely from day to day on any guarantee we get about the supply of any particular quantity or any particular goods. I must agree with the Minister that it is not a healthy thing that there should be such a disparity between our export and import figures. A gap of £33,000,000 is certainly abnormal under any circumstances and it is a bad thing for the country if it has to finance its purchases from outside by borrowing from its capital resources.

It is quite conceivable that that condition of affairs may continue for some time. So long as the present difficulty in obtaining supplies continues, it will be impossible for industrial production to be increased very much. The only branch of production which can be increased is agricultural production and I think the Government is not making any adequate or suitable effort to get that increased agricultural production at the moment. In looking up the figures of agricultural production, there is one thing that strikes you in a startling fashion, that is, that those figures have remained stationary for many years past. What that is due to I do not know but, at all events, if we are to hold our own in the future it will be necessary for us to increase these figures very substantially. I suggest to the Minister that he should see to it that steps are taken immediately to ascertain the reasons why agricultural production is stagnant and why it is that, despite all the changes which have taken place here during the last few years, despite the revolutionary changes during the war years, agricultural production has remained stagnant. I submit also that that is not a healthy sign and I suggest to the Minister that it is the duty of the Government to examine that unhealthy symptom very carefully and try to find a remedy for it at the earliest possible moment.

The Minister is to be encouraged for trying to develop alternative sources of power. He mentioned, in the course of his statement, that he is making efforts to develop electric power to the utmost of its capacity, trying to develop peat resources, even if it costs the country an enormous amount of money to do so, and experimenting with the use of fuel oil in place of petrol. I certainly think that it is very unlikely that we will ever see coal imported into this country in the same generous quantities as in pre-war years. For that reason, it behoves us to utilise whatever sources of power we have to their utmost capacity, so that when the next upheaval occurs—and I sincerely hope it is a long way off—we will not be dependent on outside support but will be able to rely to a very large extent on our own resources.

The Minister mentioned also that Bord na Móna will be solely responsible from 1948 for turf production. The county councils hitherto produced a very substantial share of the turf used by the people in the non-turf areas and each year they succeeded in reducing the cost of production. I am greatly afraid that, when Bord na Móna is charged with the sole responsibility of producing turf, the cost of production is likely to go up again. It is unfair, in my opinion, that the taxpayers should have to subsidise turf production to the extent to which they have to do it at the present time. This question has been discussed on many occasions in the Dáil and I think last year when we were discussing this Estimate it was suggested to the Minister that an exhaustive examination should be made into the question of turf production, distribution and sale, to find out who was profiteering at the expense of the taxpayer and of the unfortunate consumer. After all, when one considers the price which the producer is paid for the turf and when one relates that to the price which the unfortunate consumer has to pay, one is naturally forced to ask oneself the question: "What happened to all the money spent in between?"

I submit, despite what the Minister himself has said, that the transport of the turf does not and should not cost the enormous sum it is supposed to be costing the people at the present time. I suggest also that there is room certainly for reorganisation of this whole problem of turf production. The problem must be examined right from the source until it reaches the consumer and, if there is an exhaustive examination made by people who understand the position, I believe honestly that it will be possible to reduce the cost to the consumer very substantially. It is unfair that the taxpayer should be asked to subsidise it to the extent to which he is subsidising at present. Mark this, on account of changes which have taken place recently, in the increased wages of turf workers, which will entail an increase in the cost of transport, the probability is that, in the Budget this year, the Minister for Finance will be asked to increase the subsidy of 10/-which he gave last year to £1 a ton this year. Again the unfortunate taxpayer will be mulcted, in order to make up for the disorganisation—it is nothing else—in turf production and distribution. I am greatly afraid that the change which the Minister proposes is certainly not a good one, despite the fact that 16 new machines are to be employed on the bogs this year. If the figures are examined it will be found, I think, that on the bogs where machinery is used at the present time the cost of production is higher than it is where the slean and the other ordinary instruments are used.

The Minister made some extraordinary statements in connection with tourist development. I admit that there is probably quite a substantial revenue to be derived from tourist traffic. It is nonsensical to think that we can ever hope to make this country a paradise for tourists. Admittedly, there was a huge influx of them last year, but they came because the food here was good and plentiful and they wanted a feed. Does the Minister or his officials imagine that when conditions are normal in Europe again we are going to get many tourists to come here?

I think anybody who travelled in the pre-war years must have realised that the Americans especially prefer to go to the Continent. We have magnificent scenery, but if you want to become acquainted, in a material sense, with the roots of Western civilisation, you will go to other countries where monuments going back to the very beginnings of our civilisation are to be seen. We have here, of course, certain evidence of that civilisation, but nothing to compare with what is to be witnessed in continental countries. Consequently, I do not see why we should be asked to vote this enormous sum of money for the building of luxury hotels and the development of our seaside resorts. It seems to me to be a scandalous waste of money.

The Minister said that the tourist traffic of last year did not affect our domestic ration. In the statistical return it was stated—so I read some-where—that 500,000 people visited this country last year. If the Minister thinks that the influx of such a large number of people, even supposing they remained only for a week or a fortnight, did not affect food supplies here, then I do not know what to say. I am sure he did not mean his statement to be taken in that sense. At the moment we have a rigid rationing system. Why, therefore, should we encourage tourists to come here? During the continuance of that rigid rationing system, I think we should forget about the Tourist Board and make no provision for tourists this year. We need all the food we have in the country for ourselves. In our cities and towns we have very poor people who are very badly in need of all the food they can get. Even last year they could have done with a great deal of the food that was consumed by visitors. I earnestly suggest to the Minister that it is time for him to review his outlook with regard to tourist development. I cannot see that it will be ever possible for us to develop a worth-while traffic in tourism here. I feel that when normal conditions return in Europe, and when many of the cities and towns on the Continent are rebuilt, you will have visitors flocking there, as they did in the pre-war days. They will forget there is such a place as Ireland, except perhaps the few who will visit Ireland for sentimental reasons. I cannot see any justification whatever for this proposed huge expenditure on hotels and seaside resorts.

Provision is being made for the expenditure of £500,000 on the carrying out of a survey of the mineral resources of the country. I was under the impression that the country had been surveyed on umpteen occasions. I remember seeing in the Minister's Department about 1924 and 1925 huge files containing reports of surveys made over a period of years in all parts of the country for the purpose of ascertaining the mineral content of the resources in those areas. I was interested at the time in some developments that were contemplated in the Arigna area. The Minister is now proposing to expend this huge sum of money on a fresh survey. I certainly should be very reluctant to agree to that unless the Minister is prepared to advance some better reasons than he has already given for that expenditure. As I have said, surveys have already been carried out here on numerous occasions by experts from other countries. The Minister will find their reports pigeon-holded in his Department, or in some other Government building. I do not know what type of survey he is proposing to undertake. If it is to follow on the lines of earlier surveys then I would be very reluctant indeed to agree to the expenditure of so much money on it.

The Minister mentioned that he is aiming at a target of 575,000 cwts. of butter this year. How he arrived at that figure I do not know, in view of the fact that our butter production has been falling consistently over a number of years. It is also admitted that the cow population is falling. I suppose we are to take it that his colleague, the Minister for Agriculture, has advised him that this target can be achieved. It is a phenomenon that in an agricultural country like this butter should have to be rationed. The Minister for Agriculture has given no adequate explanation for the catastrophic fall in butter production over the last six or seven years. Apart altogether from the question of rationing it is absolutely essential that a situation of that kind should be arrested immediately. If it is allowed to develop further, the danger is that butter production will fall so disastrously that there will not be any butter at all for half the population of the country.

Mr. Lemass

A 50 per cent. increase in price will increase production.

Mr. Roddy

I agree, but I suggest that the Minister should discuss this question with his colleague, the Minister for Agriculture, and see whether he with his officials will not undertake an examination of the causes which have brought about such a serious fall in butter production.

They should devise some scheme for arresting that fall in production and restoring our butter to the position which it occupied less than ten years ago, when the situation in this country was normal. The position has undoubtedly worsened considerably, even taking into consideration the farmer's butter.

Mr. Browne

There are just a few items on this Vote on which I would like to make some comment. First of all, I should like to join with Deputy Roddy as regards the method employed in the purchase of Scotch seed oats.

Mr. Lemass

I did not want to drop on Deputy Roddy, because I did not wish to do so, but I must tell the Deputy that this is a matter entirely for the Minister for Agriculture. It is he who controls the importation of seed oats.

Mr. Roddy

Is the permit not granted by the Minister's Department?

Mr. Lemass

No, it is granted by the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. Browne

I understood it was necessary to get a licence to import.

An Ceann Comhairle

Yes, from the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. Browne

Not from the Department of Industry and Commerce?

An Ceann Comhairle

No; the Minister says not.

Mr. Browne

I was under the impression all the time that it came from the Minister for Industry and Commerce. However, I want to say a few words now with regard to maize imports. I take it those are controlled by the Minister.

Mr. Lemass

That is right.

Mr. Browne

The people in County Mayo feel that they have been somewhat unjustly treated in regard to the control of maize. We do not approve of the method of distribution at present in force. I understand that the Minister has a small board which deals with maize imports and that this board makes recommendations to the Minister as to the best method of distribution. In other words anything they do in regard to distribution has the authority of the Minister. The complaint in Mayo is that maize is delivered to three port areas, carriage paid. It bears no haulage costs. Now pre-war there were ports which imported maize directly from the Argentine, such as Ballina, Westport and Galway. They imported in small coasters with a carrying capacity of about 500 tons and they were able to compete on that basis with the big millers. Under the present arrangement all maize is shipped directly to the port of Dublin and redistributed from there to a few selected ports, carriage paid. Sligo and Mayo are bordering counties with a string of small towns dividing them. The net result of the present situation is that the people in Sligo are able to obtain maize at 12/6 a ton less than the people in Mayo. Maize is primarily used for egg and bacon production. Mayo and Sligo have to send all their goods to the port of Dublin for shipment. Now, under this arrangement Mayo is placed in an unfair position because she is competing at a disadvantage with a neighbouring county.

Another disadvantage which arises is that in the one border town you may have eight traders dealing in maize. Four of those traders may now be getting their quotas from Sligo and the other four from Mayo. The four graded in Sligo have the advantage of the 12/6 a ton. The position is not too bad at the moment because there is price control but the day is fast approaching when price control will cease to be necessary. When that day comes the people in Mayo who now deal in maize will find themselves losing their trade because of the present disparity which exists in the price as between Mayo and Sligo. I make a special appeal to the Minister to do something in relation to Ballina port. If he makes inquiries he will discover that pre-war practically all the maize requirements for Mayo were discharged at the port of Ballina, milled in the town of Ballina and distributed throughout the county. Steps should be taken immediately to bring about some parity in the price as between the two counties thereby giving Mayo an opportunity of holding its own when price control ceases to exist.

There is another point which I would like to raise with the Minister in connection with the supply of beet manure. Hitherto that was supplied through the ordinary trading channels. Every farmer got his permit for super-phosphates and potato fertiliser and he gave his permit to the agent in the nearest town. The agent sent away the permit and obtained his supply directly for him. I understand that that method is being changed this year and the manure is being distributed through another channel, and not through the local distributors. I feel that any change in the method such as that is taking away a means of livelihood from a certain section of the community. It is depriving a section of the community of a certain amount of trade and I would like to point out in this connection that that particular section plays an important part in the agricultural life of the country. There are times when farmers must obtain credit because they are short of cash and the different agents throughout the country provided a useful service as regards such credit in the past.

Deputy Bartley spoke about the flour ration and I agree generally with the comments he made. In north Mayo we have areas very similar in character to parts of Galway. I am sure the Minister is aware of the conditions obtaining in Achill and on the western coast. The people there can grow only very small quantities of food. There is an increased demand in these places for flour in May, June and July. I should say that the demand would be at least double the demand in the other nine months because during that period the potatoes are exhausted and they have to depend on flour. It has been suggested that perhaps the ration could be reduced in other areas and increased in these areas. I do not agree with that. I am perfectly satisfied that the present ration does not meet the demand in any area even where other foods, such as eggs and potatoes, are fairly plentiful. There should be an increased ration in the poorer areas, especially in Achill and around the western coast, particularly in the summer months.

There is a certain amount of wastage in flour handled by the retailer. The retailer applies to the miller for the quantity of flour equivalent to the value of the coupons he receives. There is no allowance for wastage. A retailer may get one ton of flour a week which has to be divided into 100 to 150 parcels. In my opinion there would be at least a five to eight-stone loss on every ton. Flour rationing has been in operation for about 14 weeks. That would mean that the retailer would be short in his flour each week. Some arrangement should be made, such as is made in the case of sugar, for wastage.

The question of kerosene has been referred to by other Deputies. The ordinary consumer was very badly treated last November and December. In Mayo the consumer had no light for the whole month of December and the greater part of November. Candles were in short supply because when oil became plentiful they did not store candles. The November ration of kerosene was not distributed until the end of December or early January. I would suggest that, as in the case of the tea ration, the kerosene should be sent out a month in advance. Some arrangement should be made that the October ration would be delivered early in September to the consumer and that system should continue for the other months. That would alleviate the hardship.

In connection with the holding of fairs, the railway company are making arrangements and are doing everything possible to provide facilities at fairs for the removal of cattle by lorry. I have been attending fairs and I say it is nothing short of extreme cruelty the way cattle are loaded at fairs. I would recommend that the railway company and the owners of the fairs should provide loading banks on every fair green. I suggest that it would not be fair to ask the owners of the fairs to erect them, that it is really the work of the railway, but I would be perfectly satisfied if the owners of the fairs would contribute. It would be of great advantage to the railway. It would save time and would provide a quicker service and it would not cost a great deal. In an ordinary fair green, a loading bank for the loading of one lorry at a time would be sufficient and £25 would go a good way to meet the cost of providing it. That would ensure that cattle would not be abused. At present the cattle have to be abused in order to get them loaded on to the lorries. The provision of a loading bank would obviate that. I would ask the Minister to put that matter before Córas Iompair Éireann.

I make a special appeal to the Minister in regard to the price of maize meal in Mayo and the method by which maize is being distributed and sold. The people of Mayo are merely asking to be put on the same basis in this matter as Sligo, especially in view of the fact that we have had to import the corn through the port and have had to compete pre-war with the Sligo people. We ask to be put on the same basis as Sligo.

Mr. Beirne

During the course of the debate this evening the Minister was complimented by some Deputies on his control and management of his Department. I have nothing to say to that. The compliment may be well deserved, I think it is fairly well deserved, but there is a point where a man may exceed his ambitions and may become over-enthusiastic. To my mind, in many respects, the Minister has become over-enthusiastic.

In that way I think one result has accrued which I do not like to see in this country. Private enterprise in this country has sunk to a very low ebb. It has been sacrificed because monopolies were given to certain individuals and establishments in this country. We are all aware, of course, that the Minister and the Government have established and have, to a large extent, subsidised many of the leading concerns in this country, including Córas Iompair Éireann, the Tourist Board, Fuel Importers, Grain Importers, Seed Assemblers and several others that I cannot think of at the moment. The success of these institutions has not become very apparent up to the present. As a matter of fact, many of these institutions have not given the service we should expect from them. Córas Iompair Éireann in particular has not given us, up to the present, the service that we should expect, seeing that they are a Government or a semi-Government institution. I hold the Tourist Board is, more or less, as a previous speaker has said, a white elephant. I do not believe that the tourist business in this country will be of very much importance to this country in time to come. The great influx of tourists from other countries into this country over the past few years is due to the fact that we have plenty of food and that we satisfied them as far as food is concerned, and perhaps also with beverages which they could not obtain in their own countries. When normal times return and travel is restored, many things will militate against us as far as the tourist business is concerned. On the one hand, the climate is by no means an inducement to foreigners to come to this country; and, on the other hand, we have not many bathing attractions in this country. When we take Killarney from this country all the rest goes with it, with the exception of perhaps a few reasonably good seaside resorts. I do not think we have anything else in this country that would appeal to tourists, and until our climate improves materially there can be no attraction for tourists in this country. When we experience seasons such as we have experienced in the last three or four years no man in his senses would come during the summer months to spend a holiday in this country.

Fuel Importers, Limited, have got a monopoly for the distribution of fuel in this country. I think that is entirely wrong and grossly unfair and unjust to any individual who is in a position to supply perhaps to a friend or neighbour in the city a lorry load of turf. Such a person cannot do so unless it goes through the channels established by the Government, namely, Fuel Importers, Limited.

Grain Importers, Limited, also has a monopoly. It was stated here that Grain Importers, Limited, are controlled or directed by the Minister who is present this evening. I think they are, but I am not so sure. When the question of the importation of oats was being discussed here this evening he said it was a matter for the Minister for Agriculture. I think Grain Importers, Limited, come within his jurisdiction and I think they have unlimited powers which they should not have and which operate to the exclusion of private enterprise in this country.

Seed Assemblers are a body which have never done anything good, bad or indifferent. I have often wondered if, during these times of acute distress and in passing through the emergency, we were serious about the expansion of industry and commerce in this country. I often wonder now if we ever put our shoulder properly to the wheel to try to expand and to develop the small resources which we have in this country. I know our mineral resources are limited, and very limited, and I know that by the greatest concentration on the development of those the results will not be anything like what we may expect but I think that there should be steady acceleration in this direction and it has occurred to me that there is no such acceleration taking place. As a matter of fact one particular case has come to my notice where an enterprising man was refused certain facilities when he made application to expand an existing industry in a small locality. Before I finish I will bring that to the Minister's notice.

I want to tell the Minister with regard to flour and bread rationing that the position is very acute at the present time. I myself happen to be in a small country business in a rural district and I am in a position to give the Minister first-hand knowledge of what is happening at the present time.

The allowance granted is entirely inadequate and insufficient. I know that in families where, perhaps, there may be seven or eight people, the allowance of 4½ lbs. of flour per week may be worked out all right by having their allowances supplemented by an extra meal of potatoes or porridge or something like that, but the supply is entirely inadequate for small families of two, three or four persons. That is my experience. I have known people in two or three instances to be without food for two or three days and, if at all possible, there should be some increase in the allowance made to those classes of people. I am serious about that and I know what I am talking about because I am dealing with these matters day after day. Another matter which has given rise to a certain amount of confusion and disappointment in rural areas is the exchange of "U" coupons for confectionery. In my area there are three bread delivery vans operating. These men started business within the last two or three years—anyway they are licensed bakers—but none of them is in a position to supply confectionery because they have not got a sugar allocation. The position is that the people of the area are exclusively dependent for bread on these three suppliers. The customers naturally would like a little confectionery, but if they wish to exchange their "U" coupons for something in the nature of bread confectionery they cannot do so. I wish to bring this matter to the Minister's notice as I have made representations on behalf of those bakers to his Department, but with no success up to the present. In one district which I know particularly they are not in a position to exchange the "U" coupons for confectionery and I want to stress the position of those bakers and the consequent position of the people in my district.

At the present moment, and for a considerable time, there has been an acute scarcity of margarine in my district. We who are in the business are not able to exchange margarine for the coupons deposited with us. With the butter ration at two ounces a week, there is naturally a demand for margarine. I hope the Minister will see that supplies are more liberal—that we will have supplies adequate to meet the reasonable and just demands of our customers.

I think in these abnormal times, when transport is so difficult, some of the restrictions should be removed with regard to the use of lorries. Coming up to Dublin every week I notice fleets of lorries going down from the city to the country districts, empty. Merchants and many other people in the rural areas are most anxious to get goods from Dublin. Those lorries could easily take the stuff and I think there should be some relaxation of the restrictions that have been imposed on the lorries. There should be some concession so that they could take goods on the return journey from Dublin to the country and not be allowed to travel empty. The services of the lorries could be utilised with great advantage to the country.

The Minister may say that Córas Iompair Éireann if approached will cater for those people who want goods delivered from the city. There is a little difficulty in getting that done. You have to approach the railways company; you must write to them and say you want stuff delivered on a certain day. At the same time you may have a neighbour conveying turf to Dublin and you could say to him: "If you take this stuff down from Dublin I will reward you for doing so". Much time might be saved that way.

With regard to the rates charged for the conveyance of cattle from fairs in the country to Dublin or on the northern line, I may say that cattle are being conveyed from the fairs in my area either to Dublin or Collooney and traders prefer Collooney, which is on the northern line, because they get better rates than they would from Córas Iompair Éireann. I would like to see our rates adjusted so as to compare favourably with the charges on the northern line. It is by no means economical to send cattle by lorry to Dublin now. If you could get them there by any other means it would be far more economical. Indeed, I think it would be cheaper to get them there by aeroplane.

The reaction to the high charges is this, that the man who sells the cattle has to foot the bill and it means an increase in freight of 50 or 60 per cent. and even more. That is a considerable increase and it means that the producer of the stock is being mulcted to that extent.

Mr. Davin

It is over 100 per cent.

Mr. Beirne

With the prospect of a further 20 per cent., I take it that the increase would then be 120 per cent., and that is not very good. I hope the Minister will see that these rates are reduced. These are some of the things that interest the local merchants and traders. As regards mineral development, a case was brought to my notice which, I think, deserves some consideration. This is a matter in which I have interested myself for a good while. I have in mind the Arigna coal mines. In these times of acute fuel scarcity, when our trains are lying idle, when there are no passenger trains, when industries are in a bad way for fuel, when the Dublin gasworks is threatened with having to close down and when our transport services generally are dislocated, every effort should be made to produce as much coal, timber and peat as possible. I would not like to see that effort retarded in any way. I regret to say that a praiseworthy effort by a constituent of mine has been so retarded and the reasons are very obvious to me and, I am sure, to the Minister. However, enough said about that for the present.

This man lives in the Arigna valley and his people belong to that area. He knows where coal is to be found. He is not a man who would go out on Leinster Lawn looking for coal. He is not a man who would go into the Shannon looking for coal. He is a man of practical experience. Some time ago he made representations to the Department of Industry and Commerce for a lease to mine coal on land convenient to Arigna. I made representations on his behalf in the offices in Stephen's Green. I thought I had a reasonably good case, that this man's effort should not be retarded and that no obstacle should be put in his way so long as he was prepared to produce coal which could be added to the national pool. I was disgusted and more or less surprised by the reply received from the Department on the 31st March last. It reads:—

"I am desired by the Minister for Industry and Commerce to refer to your inquiry in connection with the application of ... for a State mining lease of portion of the townland of Greaghnaslieve, County Leitrim, and to state that the Minister is not satisfied that there are coal deposits in this area which are capable of commercial extraction."

I wish to contradict that—that is wrong. The second paragraph says:—

"I am also to state than in considering the grant of State mining leases, the Minister must be assured that the applicant has sufficient technical and financial qualifications to enable him to work effectively the mineral which it is proposed to lease. In the circumstances of this case, the Minister is not prepared to grant a State mining lease."

The Minister is apparently very perturbed about any risks this man would take. He is greatly perturbed that this man should suffer financial loss. He did not consider that that would be the man's own funeral. I sent that letter to my constituent and I received a reply from him on 11/4/47 in which he says:—

"I thank you for your letter of the 10th instant. I can well understand why the Department concerned refused a permit to me to develop the mineral right which I requested. In the first paragraph of the Department's letter to you it is stated that the Minister is not satisfied that there are coal deposits in the area which are capable of commercial extraction. In answer to this I say that coal has been mined on the adjoining property successfully some years ago. It is now lying dormant, for what reason I do not know in the face of the fuel scarcity. In the event of my getting the necessary permit from the Department to work the coal deposits in the area which I requested, I can guarantee that inside of three days, with the help of an experienced miner, that we will have coal on the bank."

With one experienced miner to assist him, he would have coal on the bank and he would not be worried about the financial risk. His letter goes on:—

"In relation to the second paragraph of the Department's letter I wish to state that I cannot, unfortunately, produce a banker's reference as I never had a banking account, only a thrift saving account which I have for my child. Nevertheless, if granted the necessary permit to develop the mineral rights of the property concerned, I shall make available the necessary capital to do so."

There is a man who is prepared to add to our fuel supplies and he will not get permission from the Department. That is highly unjust. The Minister may say that this is a coal mining area and that he will induce miners from an adjacent mine and that the output will not be affected by the opening of this mine—that the position will just remain the same and that the output in the area will be just the same. That is quite wrong. I want to convince the Minister that there would be no such inducement offered to any other miners in the area, that this man, who might get one experienced miner, will provide the necessary help and that he will not interfere with other coal miners in the area. I think that the reply which I got was very unjust and I intend to make further representations. Should I fail in these representations, I say that the Government is not offering co-operation to individuals in this area to assist them in producing essential fuel for the nation as a whole.

Domhnall Ua Donnchadha

Reference has been made to the increase in the quantity of maize which will be available in the immediate future and a previous speaker spoke of maize as if it were used only for the purpose of feeding fowl. In some parts of the country, maize meal forms part of the ordinary diet of human beings. It is to be hoped, as it has been a tradition in some places for generations to use it in that way, that particular care will be taken to have those places supplied with it in somewhat the same proportion as flour has been supplied. At the present time, I understand the price of maize meal is controlled but its distribution is not controlled so that if a wholesaler has any disagreement with a retailer he can withdraw the retailer's quota. Now our regulations are made not in the interests of retailers but in the interests of consumers. They are made in the interests of the plain people and I do hope that the Minister, when a matter like that is brought to his attention, will so amend his regulations, if amendment is necessary, that nobody will suffer because there might be a difference of opinion between a retailer and a wholesaler.

As regards the supply of kerosene and its distribution, it is an extraordinary thing that the January ration in one part of South Kerry, that is in the parish of Bonane, was not distributed until the 27th March. Now that the days are getting longer and that there is a possibility that the quantity of kerosene used for domestic purposes will become less and less, I see no reason why the supply for lighting purposes for the coming winter would not be distributed as from the end of August or the beginning of September. I suggest that the supplies for the winter months should be distributed in the month before they are due, just as the supply of petrol is distributed a week before the commencement of the quarter or in the first week of the quarter. Kerosene to enable people to illuminate their houses is just as important as petrol is for those who use motor cars.

The Minister has told us that Board na Móna is to take over the work of developing our bogs, to take over not only the supply of turf for the non-turf areas but to take over generally the cutting of bogs previously operated by the county councils. There is no doubt that that will be a blessing in one way because it will release the county councils' engineering staffs for the work for which they were primarily intended and for which they were trained, that is to look after our roads. There arises, however, another question and that is whether or not the board will operate those bogs in isolated areas. We should see to it that people who have been employed for a number of years in turf production by the county councils will not be disemployed, now that turf production in these counties is to be taken over by the board. The Government is taunted periodically because of the fact that so many young men have to emigrate to seek employment. I hope that because of the change-over, such young men will not be disemployed. I hope, too, that some of the disabilities under which they have had to work for years back will be removed, particularly those imposed upon them because of the absence of shelters on the bogs. I know one case where men had to travel 28 miles by lorry to assist in turf cutting. Some of them had to travel close on three miles in the morning to join the lorry and travel home the same distance at night. If they got wet either while going to the bog or while working there during the day, there was no shelter for them. The surprise is that the absence of such shelter had not more serious consequences for these men.

I cannot understand the change of front on the part of so many of our people regarding the tourist trade. They seem to think that the country can be saved and that the bread, flour and butter rations will be increased if the tourists are kept out. It is extraordinary that some of our public men here should express themselves in that way at a time when countries all over the world, which formerly developed the tourist business, are vying with one another to provide attractions for foreign visitors. There are countries like Switzerland which, prior to the war, lived almost exclusively on the tourist business. They spent huge sums of money in bringing foreign visitors and foreign currencies to their country. There is no reason in the world why we should not encourage such people to come here. A previous speaker said that they had no place to go to. As a matter of fact he described this country as one where we have not many or varied attractions.

Mr. Davin

They could go to Kerry.

Domhnall Ua Donnchadha

In a Midland area, near the Deputy's constituency, I saw where there was a public advertisement issued, asking the local people to organise and to develop the tourist trade. There may not be as high mountains or as big lakes there as there are in Kerry but the people there seem to value the tourist trade just as much as we do in Kerry. There seems to be great play made of the tourist trade and people seem to take as a joke the mention of luxury hotels. Of course, the luxury hotels are meant for normal times. The board got the permission of this House to proceed on certain lines, and, when times are normal, I take it that the board will proceed, and there is no sense in referring to this board as a white elephant, because it plays and will play in the immediate future, le cúnamh Dé, an important part in the life of our country. We have all the attractions here which go towards making a holiday for foreign visitors, and one of the principal things we should put before them is the old Irish céad míle fáilte. I regret that any Deputy should refer to the tourist business in the terms in which it was referred to this evening.

Mr. O'Leary

I rise to speak as a worker. Deputy Anthony, Deputy Davin and Deputy Morrissey referred to unofficial strikes and spoke of the sugar strike, and Deputy Davin would seem to want to tell the House that the transport union was the cause of the stoppage in the sugar factory.

Mr. Davin

I said, the members.

Mr. O'Leary

Speaking as a member of the union, I say that that was a very unfair remark, because in the Carlow factory where the strike took place the transport union members were locked out and the strike in Mallow was unofficial. I think Deputy Davin must have had some axe to grind with regard to Deputy Morrissey and that he was referring to something that I do not at the moment understand.

Reference has been made to tourists. I am not interested at all in the tourists, but I am interested in telling the Minister that if we are to have turf produced this year and if the people are to get dry turf next winter and not the manure which was sold to them during the winter gone by, there will have to be proper supervision to ensure that the contractors putting the turf into the different dumps will put it in properly, and, if necessary, cover it with thatch of some kind. My experience is that when a contractor gets the job of putting turf into a dump, all he wants to do is to get it in and get his cheque. They bring down a machine to get it in as fast as they can and will not give the men time even to clamp it. There are gangers watching and almost timing the men, with the result that they have no opportunity of clamping it.

During the snowstorms, the snow went in through the roofs of houses all over the country and who would expect the turf to remain dry in the dumps in those conditions? It would be a great boon to the farmers if some method of protecting the turf in the dumps were devised, because they have plenty of wheaten straw which is not much use as fodder but which the people concerned could use for thatching the dumps and so ensure supplies of dry turf for the people. It was only the poor people who suffered during last winter because the big man had his tons of timber and dry turf stored away in his back yard, and no one went to the dumps but the poor people who could be seen in the City of Dublin carrying turf in go-cars and on their backs, with the water running out of the bags. Why were they short of turf? There was a stoppage of lorries following a dispute with the contractors, and, for the sake of a few shillings and an agreement, thousands and thousands of tons of turf were not delivered, a stoppage which could have been avoided if somebody had stepped in and said that the hauliers should get a living wage, should get enough to meet extra garage costs for petrol and oil.

I agree with those Deputies who referred to the transport of cattle by lorry. It is cruelty. I see cattle loaded in lorries standing for hours before going to the Dublin markets. A cattle dealer told Deputy Keating and me on our way up here last week that he had to come to Dublin because he had been told that his cattle had fallen out of the lorry on the way up and were left on the side of the road. They were not missed for some time, but it was later found that three of the bullocks had gone, bullocks which cost £45 apiece. That was due to the construction of the Córas Iompair Éireann lorries. The creels were not strong enough to keep in the animals and the swaying on the road had thrown them out.

Mr. Keating

That is correct, and I think that Deputies should not laugh when the truth is being told.

Mr. O'Leary

I have that from a cattle buyer in this city. He bought the cattle in Enniscorthy and subsequently got a wire telling him that the cattle were on the road. That is a sample of the great service provided by Córas Iompair Éireann. This is also affecting the workers, although the Minister, in 1944, gave a guarantee to the House that private lorries would not be interfered with. In my town, there were two lorries which did a daily run to Guinness' and which kept men in full-time employment. These lorries were stopped from coming to Dublin, with the result that men were laid off. I do not want to see that happening again. It is not fair to local industry and it is causing unemployment amongst lorry drivers and helpers.

I do not believe that this country cannot run a goods train at least on fair days for the carriage of cattle. It would not require a great lot of coal to bring a goods train of cattle from Wexford to Dublin. We have empty lorries tearing down the country in order to get loaded for the Dublin markets and lorries coming to Dublin with goods returning empty.

There is a great wastage there. The petrol should be conserved and our local industries should not be interfered with. In the rural areas, private lorries which were plying to Dublin have been stopped. That is not fair to those who bought the lorries for carrying their own commodities. The railway companies have sufficient and they should not want all. They have the bus service and now they want the goods service. I hope the Minister will not allow that to happen, as the laying up to private lorries in provincial towns is causing unemployment.

On the timber question, we are in a worse position than we ever have been. At one time you could get a couple of cwt. of timber from the country. Now, it is not allowed to come in. It must be brought to the turf dump and Fuel Importers give it to the merchants. Not a cwt. of timber is to be got in my town, but I see lorry loads going into private houses of men who have £15 or £10 a week. Yet, the poor man cannot get a cwt. of sticks. There is too much red tape about the fuel regulations. I am sorry that Deputy Allen has left. Not very long ago there was an auction outside Enniscorthy of 50 trees. Some people bought the trees, thinking they could make a few "bob" by buying them standing. The trees are there still. The men who gave their money to the auctioneer cannot cut the trees, because there is no permit from the Department. That is very unfair. Some neighbours of my own bought some of the trees, and they are only poor persons. If the Minister had given everybody who could get timber in the country a chance to bring it into the towns and cities and sell it at the controlled price, that would be sufficient in the way of regulation. Everybody would get a bit. The fuel position in the towns was never so bad as it is owing to that regulation regarding timber. We have no butter, but I see in the paper that butter is to go up by 2d. per lb. Where is it coming from now when they are increasing the price?

Mr. Davin

Is there not plenty of farm butter in Wexford?

Mr. O'Leary

Why is it rationed? Deputy Davin says that there is plenty of butter. Perhaps he is loading it at Dun Laoghaire for the railway company. Perhaps he is smuggling it over to some of the boys. Margarine was mentioned. I saw some time ago where the oil mills were blamed because we had no margarine. Where is all the butter of the unemployed man going? He was given a few extra shillings under the social services. If he had six in his family, he got 21 pints of milk, 24 loaves and 1½ lbs. of butter per week. The Minister for Social Services said we are doing away with the vouchers. Where has all that poor man's butter gone? All the butter given out to the unemployed must have amounted to a certain tonnage. They did away with the vouchers so as to have the butter for other people. We are talking about tourists but some of our own Ministers go over to Paris.

We have no bacon. The Sunday Independent of three weeks ago showed the amount of bacon that was leaving the country. We have a sort of flour— inferior flour—but the price is the same as obtained for white flour—4/- per stone. The Minister and the Government should put their heads together and think over this business. They know the people on this side are telling the truth. Let them go into conference and do something for the country instead of coming in here, like the Taoiseach, with a Bill about Sinn Féin funds. Nobody outside the House cares a hoot who gets the Sinn Féin funds. It was a waste of time for farmers to come here this week. It would have been better for everybody if we had been out sowing potatoes instead of here talking about the nonsensical things which came before us.

Everybody is disgusted at the way things are going on. All talk and nothing done. Since I came here, there has been no improvement; things are worse, if anything. The people are fed up with the Taoiseach, Fianna Fáil and the last Government and are hoping for a new Government. The people in this House have forgotten the people outside—the man in the street and the man on the land. They are only thought of when an election comes along. Ministers at the Fianna Fáil meetings tell their supporters to organise. The Taoiseach says the Government want to stay in power. Of course they do. Why would they not? Every one of them is doing bloody well. They are in every industry, in every racket and in everything they can get shares in. They will all become industrialists. They are mixed up with the Jews. They are getting Jews to help them. It is Jewish money that causes all the wars and owns Dublin City to-day. The man in the street can tell you that. Instead of being an Irish Government, we are an Irish-Jewish Government. Fuel Importers, Córas Iompair Éireann, coal importers, coal merchants, fuel merchants' licences and all these things will have to go.

I move to report progress.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again to-morrow.