Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 24 May 1949

Vol. 115 No. 14

Committee on Finance. - Vote 31—Fisheries.

Minister for Agriculture (Mr. Dillon)

I move:—

That a sum not exceeding £151,900 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, 1950, for Salaries and Expenses in connection with Sea and Inland Fisheries, including a Grant-in-Aid.

The House will note that this Estimate represents an increase of £87,355 on the sum asked for last year. I have no doubt the House will also note with satisfaction that part of this increase is accounted for under sub-heads G (2) and G (3), which represent the repayable advances to the Sea Fisheries Association. G (2) speaks of repayable advances for boats and gear and G (3) speaks of repayable advances for general development. Deputies will recall that for the last few years, despite everybody's best effort, we have been unable to secure for the fishermen that supply of boats and gear which we would have wished to make available. The problem very largely arose out of the difficulty of getting engines. That problem is by no means wholly resolved as yet, but the supply position continues to improve and we feel we may legitimately hope to appropriate this substantial sum this year, in the confident expectation of spending it all in loans to fishermen for the supply of boats and gear.

The sub-head relating to development envisages the work we intend to pursue, increasing our capacity to produce boats and other services for the fishermen for whom the Sea Fisheries Association caters. In that connection, I desire to direct the attention of the House particularly to a project which is peculiarly dear to my heart, that is, the decision to restore the boatyard at Meevagh, locally known as Fanny's Bay. This was a small boatyard on the north shore of County Donegal which had been there for very many years. Through it many boys from Downings and that area have passed in the course of time as apprentices. Having learned their trade, some of them have subsequently served in other boatyards here in Ireland, while others have earned distinction abroad, by use of the skill that they acquired in Meevagh boatyard. When the Killybegs boatyard was developed in Donegal, it was at first thought that its resources would be ample to cater for the requirements of the Donegal area. Experience, however, has suggested that the small boatyard of Meevagh, capable not only of carrying out repairs of the boats domiciled from Moville round to Middletown but also equipped to produce at least two boats of its own every year, would be a welcome addition to the facilities available in Donegal. In contemplation of its abandonment, the yard was allowed to fall into a state of considerable disrepair, which was prudent and sensible, inasmuch as the intention then was to abandon it altogether. I am glad to inform the House that the Sea Fisheries Association, in deciding to re-establish Meevagh, have resolved to make of it, albeit a small yard, a yard which will be perfect in every particular. I cannot too highly commend that decision on the part of the Sea Fisheries Association, for I feel it to be a matter of very real importance that, whether an enterprise sponsored by a body of the standing of the Sea Fisheries Association be large or small, of its size and capacity, it ought to come as near perfection as it is humanly possible to bring it, and that is what I look forward to having at Meevagh.

Nor has the association forgotten its duty to provide analogous facilities for the Kerry area, and we hope to develop at Dingle a growing capacity for the building of boats suited to the requirements of the fishermen in that area. We have a long waiting list of fishermen who want boats and gear. I must not over-indulge my constitutional inclination to optimism, but I shall be much disappointed if a great part of that waiting list is not eliminated by the end of this financial year. That certainly is the intention of the association.

We are also planning this year to embark upon something which I trust will prove to be merely the forerunner of a very much larger development. A pilot plant for the quick-freeze process is to be established and it will be used with a view to determining on what lines of production we can most profitably and advantageously develop the quick-freeze and attendant services. I do not pretend, and I do not think anyone can pretend, to know with certainty in advance what branches of production can most profitably be associated with the quick-freeze process in our special circumstances. We propose to learn by experience, and I want to warn the House that we shall not be afraid to run the risk of loss, in order to establish to the point of certainty whether a fair capital investment in some particular line of business would yield permanent returns where an imprudent parsimony might make the venture a failure.

Before departing from sea fisheries— and of course I anticipate that many specific questions will be raised in the course of the discussion which Deputies will want me to answer categorically—I want to deal with one point. It has long been a matter of argument and contention why in this country we do not have a deep-sea trawling fleet. We do not have it and we will not have it, for one reason only, that the best information I can get is that you must choose between the inshore fishermen and the deep-sea trawler. If we are to have deep-sea trawling, then we must do it right. We must do it on the most efficient basis, by the most economic methods and with the best equipment that money can buy. So to operate, a deep-sea trawling fleet must provide a supply of fish more than adequate for the home market in Ireland and a surplus for sale abroad.

For the moment, I ask Deputies to forget the surplus problem. If the employment of trawlers regularly delivers at our ports a supply of fish amply adequate to cater for all the domestic demands, every inshore fisherman in Ireland is thereupon disemployed, because let none of us forget that it is no solution to say that you will transfer the inshore fisherman from his present occupation to the trawlers. They will not go, and they ought not to go. That is not their line. Their life, their culture, the social pattern they have woven for themselves is one of part-time farmer and part-time fisherman. It is not a system founded on the rock of perfect efficiency and absolute economic law, but, in my judgment, it is founded on something infinitely more precious—an Irish way of life which is the way of life obtaining along our west coast from Donegal to Cork.

I fully understand that the opposite view can legitimately be held, that, in this modern world in which we live, all that sentimentality and nostalgic looking back on the past must go, that the right course is to sweep all that away and to base upon this country a deep-sea trawling fleet which will enter into competition with Grimsby and Glasgow and all the great trawling ports of the world. That is a legitimate view. I reject it but, "you pays your money and you takes your choice". I can quite understand somebody who feels himself at home in the modern tempo who has no patience with the kind of people I represented in this House when I stood for Donegal or the kind of people of West Mayo with whom I have been brought in fairly intimate contact all my life. It is not that I know them better than other Deputies do that convinces me that theirs is a way of life we should preserve but it is because of my profound certainty that that way of life is part of our social pattern, a way of fishing that belongs to our people and in which it is now natural for our people to engage and the sordid industrial horror of the modern trawler trade is a servitude to which some people who value money more than life are entitled to subject themselves but which I would be long sorry to inflict on our people to the exclusion of a very much more gracious way of living which can be made to serve the requirements of our domestic market just as well.

So that the policy I commend to this House is founded on the inshore fisherman and on him alone and my aim is to make of the Sea Fisheries Association a co-operative body representative of the inshore fishermen and of them alone and to give to them through their co-operative the exclusive right of furnishing the domestic market with fish. There will be lacunæ when the weather is peculiarly turbulent or some other unforeseen circumstances arise when, for a week or ten days, perhaps, our inshore fishermen will not be able to meet the domestic demand. In that event, their co-operative, acting on their behalf, will bring in fish from abroad to fill the need of one or two or three days until the normal landings of our own men pick up the task of furnishing this market.

That deals with demersal fish. There remains, of course, the constant problem of providing for landings of pelagic fish. Sometimes one is inclined almost to the view that we are presented with insoluble problems. I am glad to tell the House that these problems are beginning to look less insoluble than they used to do and I am not without hope that, by carefully organising supplies of herring, we may establish a canning industry here which will provide a profitable commercial outlet for a very considerable volume of fish. As Deputies know, mackerel is very much a seasonal market and herring often presents a serious problem. Recently, I think, our experience with mackerel has not been as difficult as it often was before. I do not see my way through the problem of a regular and adequate market for mackerel as clearly as I think I see it for herring, but all that I know of as possible is being done and will continue to be done to seek a market and I would hope that, in time, the guarantee which is at present available to fishermen for their landings of demersal fish will be practicable for pelagic fish as well.

May I refer to one small detail? Our practice has been to provide a guaranteed price for landings of demersal fish, the marketing problem being one for the association itself. There are certain seasons in the year when the abundance of Providence speeds whiting towards our shore and fishermen in certain parts of the country can either go out and sit in the middle of the whiting and bring in boats loaded to the gunwale or go a little further and bring in choicer varieties of fish. This is true for two or three months of the summer season and, accordingly, I have advised the Sea Fisheries Association that, during these months, when these alternatives are available to fishermen they must, for their own protection, be advised that if they elect to confine their attention to whiting they must be prepared to have them sold on consigment on the market when they sometimes fetch a very dismal price, because they always have the option of going out beyond the whiting and bringing in these varieties of demersal fish for which there is a guaranteed price, the size of which they know before they put to sea. If they want to spare themselves the extra effort and confine their attention to whiting, they must face the peril of a market which they themselves elect to overload.

The Department of Fisheries is, of course, also concerned with inland fisheries. Perhaps I should tell the House that the age old battle goes on to define precisely the territorial limits, the three-mile limit or the nine-mile limit; how these limits should be drawn and whether international law prescribes that the three-mile limit in a bay that is six miles wide leaves a neutral hole in the middle of the bay. That still jogs cheerfully on and international lawyers exchange long queries and rejoinders. It is not the intention of your Government, now or in any foreseeable time, to send the fleet to sea for the purpose of challenging rival navies on the interpretation of obscure points of international law. The three-mile limit is universally acknowledged. In so far as we can hunt the offending trawlers out of those areas we intend to continue doing so. I have been listening to strong reprobation delivered against the Government of this country for 20 years for its failure to dismiss the foreign trawlers. Many is the powerful speech I have made in Deputy Brian Brady's constituency upon that very subject. It seems always a simple thing to do and, during the last 12 months, it is a matter to which I have turned my attention not infrequently. It seems to me that, to protect a coast line even of such modest length as our own, one would want to dispose practically the whole British Navy in order to have posted at the point of vantage an appropriate vessel to deal with every errant poacher. It occurred to me at one time that our air force might contribute by doing an occasional patrol. I do not dismiss that entirely from the sphere of possibilities and it is a matter which I intend to take up with the Minister for Defence in the hope that even though it might not produce the prompt arrest by service vessels on wireless notification from aircraft at least it would be in terrorem and might discourage skippers——

Captain Cowan

If they engaged in live practice?

Mr. Dillon

I think that even though they steal our fish we would be a little uncomfortable if we started dispatching all those respectable trawler captains to Davy Jones' locker. Arrest them, deprive them of their trawls, harry and insult them—but we must draw the line somewhere.

Mr. S. Collins

Take the boats from them.

Mr. Dillon

We will go to very great lengths indeed, but I am afraid there is no use pretending that I would even pretend to pretend that I would ask anyone to blast them out of the sea. Short of that, I am prepared to do almost anything that would inconvenience and annoy them if they trespass within the three-mile limit, which they undoubtedly know they ought not to do. I think Deputies ought to bear in mind that, while every area sends its Deputy to this House to protest most furiously against the poaching of these trawlers, it has been known that these trawlers have established friendly and profitable relations with some of our citizens who have been most vocal in denouncing their scandalous incursions upon our territorial waters.

Captain Cowan

That is the modern technique.

Mr. Dillon

Now to turn to inland fisheries, I am a great believer in the brown trout. I believe the brown trout fisheries of this country are of great value. Every device the mind of man has thought of for increasing the population of our brown trout rivers has been canvassed to and fro but it seems to me that there are two diametrically opposite expert opinions upon any proposition anybody ever makes. Accordingly, I have listened to all the experts, and I am going to try a few experiments. I am told that you ought to stock the river with imported fry but there is equally good authority for the proposition that one sprightly pike will do more damage than all the hatcheries in Ireland can repair and that if you pour fry into the river when the pike is on the rampage, you are simply fattening him up, pandering to him, where he otherwise would have to swim further afield. Nevertheless, the hatcheries continue to function. Certain local fishing associations operate hatcheries of their own. These we are glad to help by providing ova which we import whenever we can find supplies, and by giving them small grants and technical assistance whenever they apply to us.

Over and above these, we are now proceeding with a new experiment. If it is true that coarse fish are inimical to the trout population of a good lake or stream, it is equally true, I think, that the complete elimination of coarse fish and eels may, result in either of two disasters—that the bottom vegetation becomes so abundant that the trout become bottom feeders and will not rise, or that the trout so multiply that the available feed in the lake gets out of proportion to the trout population and the average-sized shrinks to a minimum of about three ounces, where it appears to establish balance, and you get, as in Loch Talt in County Sligo, a very large population of undersized fish and no fish over four ounces at all.

While, by pragmatic procedure, I have now decided on four lakes, out of which we propose to dredge the coarse fish, returning to the water of the lake 25 per cent. of the whole. If that does not seem to establish a satisfactory balance between the thriving trout population and the controlling fish population, we shall look to see if it has given any encouragement in one direction or another. If it appears to have helped in some degree, why then, we must try different percentages of fish to see if an artificial balance which is of maximum advantage to the trout population can be established. Another theory presented is that the ph content of the water is a matter of consequence to the fish population. Therefore, in suitable streams and lakes, experiments will be carried out this year and for some time to come in an effort, with reasonable economy, to control the ph content of the water. Deputies will fully understand that it is no easy task to maintain an artificial ph content of water: (1) to ensure that it is not raised too high and (2) to prevent it going too low. In so far as it is practicable, within reasonable limits of expense, the experiment will be made and on the results the policy must be formed. If any Deputy here has any other proposal which partakes of commonsense I beg of him not to be backward in presenting it. I can assure him that he need never blush in the presence of experts because, no matter how distinguished or exalted they may be, I will find an expert of equal distinction and equal exaltation who will categorically contradict the first. I do not want to suggest for a moment that I have not the greatest veneration and admiration for experts. There is no doubt whatever that some men have given a life of study to this whole problem. But it is a science that is at so early a stage at the present time that it is quite possible for men of equal distinction to reach diametrically opposite conclusions, both believing that their process of reasoning is impeccable. I should mention in that connection that we are collaborating with Great Britain, Norway and, I think, some other Atlantic countries in the campaign to tag salmon for the purpose of establishing with greater certainty their migratory habits. At first I understood these experiments to have indicated that the whole theory of salmon returning to the river where they were spawned was false. Now it appears that that is not true at all. The results clearly indicate that the venerable theory that salmon return to the river of their spawning is true. I would not be in the least surprised if the results of next year's tagging produces a pretty general report that neither of these propositions is universally valid. But with time I do not doubt that scientific certainty will emerge and in the carrying out of experiments of this kind patience and persistence are of their very essence; and we must firmly resolve not to be discouraged with the perplexities of conflicting results in the early stages.

My predecessor, Deputy Dr. Ryan, was responsible for the legislation which brought fresh-water netting to an end in the beginning of last year. I am at present engaged in assessing the compensation due. We have received claims which amount to something like £150,000 for rights and these are under examination and discussion. Claims in respect of displacement of employees represent a much smaller sum and we have already agreed to and discharged claims amounting to £1,456. There remain outstanding further sums which we do not doubt will be agreed between us and the claimants and in so far as the limits of reason will permit, we shall try to spare the claimants the expense or annoyance of seeking arbitration. So far as any degree of generosity will permit of the equitable settlement of claims without that expense being imposed upon claimants, we have interpreted the instructions of the Oireachtas to mean that we should err rather on the side of liberality.

There is much more that could with relevance be said in introducing this Estimate, but I do not know that it is necessary to go further than I have gone, provided always that Deputies will kindly remember that any topic which is of interest to them is of interest to me and, if they will mention it, I will be glad to furnish the necessary information if I am in a position to do so, but, if not, I shall find out what they want to know and communicate with them directly as soon as may be.

Dr. Ryan

I move that the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration. The general tone of the Minister's speech was very optimistic for the future of fisheries in this country. In general, he gave his reasons for being optimistic, but I should like very much if he could give a little more detail on a number of matters mentioned. He pointed out that there is a larger amount of money passed on to the Sea Fisheries Association this year for the building of boats, equipment and development. We all hear, I suppose, from time to time of applicants who are very anxious to get a boat but who have not got very much encouragement about even the approximate month or year they are likely to get it. I think I heard the Minister say that he thought all applicants would be satisfied before the end of the year.

Mr. Dillon

I said that I hoped the greater part of the waiting list would be eliminated.

Dr. Ryan

I take them to be genuine applicants. If we could believe that, we would be very satisfied. I should like if the Minister could give us some figures on which he bases that hope. For instance, if he could tell us how many boats are being turned out per month or quarter in the boatyards now established, we might have some data for assessing whether the applicants are likely to be satisfied within the next 12 months or so. I believe that the position with regard to gear is very much easier. There, again, the Minister says that, although the position has improved considerably with regard to engines, which are the big trouble, the full solution of that problem has by no means been reached. I wonder could we have even an approximate estimate of the number of engines that will be available during the year and, therefore, the number of boats which can be fully equipped.

The marketing of fish is a very important matter because, in regard to sea fisheries at least, one of the objects of the Minister and of the association is to give the inshore fishermen a living, and marketing is a very important matter. There has been for many years a surplus of certain types of fish which is not absorbed in the home market, principally salmon, shellfish, herrings and mackerel. I think the other varieties of fish are usually absorbed at home and, in fact, are hardly ever available in sufficient quantities for the home market. So far as I know, the agreement with regard to salmon for export this year has been on the same lines as for the last couple of years and, on the whole, has been satisfactory.

Mr. Dillon

There has been a slight improvement.

Dr. Ryan

That is good. With regard to shellfish, it is necessary to improve the yield, as it were. In the case of oysters, for instance, beds must be laid from time to time. I should like the Minister to give us some information as to what progress has been made and what is the report with regard to the oyster beds laid during the last ten years. Oyster beds take a long time to develop, and it is not easy to get a final report within a few years. There were oyster beds laid ten or 12 years ago. I should like to know what the report with regard to them is and whether the laying of beds is being continued.

The mussel industry is a very important one in a few centres and mussels surplus to home consumption must find a market by export. In Great Britain the medical officers of health in the various counties were refusing to accept these mussels unless they went through a purification tank. Some time before the war there was a tank erected at Cromane, County Kerry, which was doing very good work. At that time we were being pressed to erect tanks in other centres, in particular on the banks of the Boyne. At the time we said that we should like to have a few years' experience of the working of the tank in Cromane to find out how efficient it was and that, having gained that experience, we would probably proceed to erect a tank at Mornington, perhaps with improvements, in view of the experience gained. I should like the Minister to give us some information with regard to the intentions of the Sea Fisheries Association as to the erection of further purification tanks.

I heard complaints quite recently with regard to the marketing of mackerel. It appears that the price for some time back has been very poor. In fact, the price got for the fish in England would go very little further than paying the expense of packing and export. It looks as if the buyers will have to refuse actually to take the mackerel from the fishermen unless things can be improved somewhat. The Minister did not give us any specific information with regard to any negotiations he may have had with the British for the selling of herrings or mackerel in Great Britain or whether there was any hope of getting back some of the old markets we had many years ago on the Continent and in America for some of those fish. The home market, of course, is very important. In the years when I was Minister for Fisheries complaints were always made, and justifiably made, that in the Midlands it was almost impossible to get fish at all. The complaint was often made that even in centres where fish was caught it was impossible to get fish, on the day they wanted it, at any rate. Towards the end of the war there appeared to be a great hope that, with the big advance made in the various grades of quick freezing and quick cooling that had been discovered, there was a good future for a process of that kind in getting fish consigned to inland markets and, in fact, also in getting fish held over in the case of a big glut to supply the market when fish was not so plentiful. I would like the Minister, although he touched on the subject, to give us very much more detail if he possibly could on these various processes and what use has been made of them or how far experimentation has gone in using these various grades of freezing and cooling in the holding of fish either for transit for immediate sale or for holding over for another time when fish would be less plentiful.

The Minister expressed an opinion which, I must say, I am very interested in. He did not think that there was room in this country for both inshore fishermen and for deep-sea trawlers. The Minister said that was a point of view. He is quite right. That controversy, as it were, has gone on in this country for as long as I have been interested in the fishery business, anyway. I think that probably the great majority agree with the Minister that the development of a trawler fleet here would interfere adversely with inshore fishermen. I do not hold that view, I must say. I think they could be made complementary to each other. The Minister did say, for instance, that the inshore fishermen cannot go out sometimes at all and at other times can only get, perhaps, one variety of fish. They cannot get the variety at certain times of the year even if the weather is quite good and when the weather is bad they cannot go out. Trawlers, of course, can go out at all times. Not only that, but they can go to different places and are, therefore, able to get the varieties that the inshore fishermen cannot get and would, as it were, act in a complementary way to the activities of the inshore fishermen. I think we should look on it in that way.

I quite agree that we should not even try—we cannot, I am quite sure— to divert inshore fishermen to the trawler business. In any case, they are usually different men altogether. As the Minister pointed out, it is the small farmer who usually does the inshore fishing. He is usually not a full-time fisherman and not a full-time farmer. Those that engage in trawler fishing are really full-time sailors as far as the occupation goes. We are not going to draw one from the other. I would press on the Minister to keep an open mind on this for another while to see if it would not be possible to have the two systems going together, one being complementary to the other. If we do not have our deep-sea trawling fleet we will have to import fish at certain times. It is not so easy to import quantities of fish at times when our inshore fishermen cannot go out, because at these particular times it is only natural to expect that fish will be scarcer than usual in Great Britain also, the weather being bad, and we may not get a great variety from there when we want it. On the whole, it would be better to have the fish caught by our own deep-sea trawlers.

Mr. Dillon

May I ask the Deputy, does he not feel that efficient deep-sea trawling would flood the market?

Dr. Ryan

No, I do not think so. Of course, I admit that is one of our difficulties in this country, that our market is so small that even when the inshore fishermen, as the Minister knows, get a big catch of, say, herrings or mackerel, the country is flooded immediately. My idea would be that these trawlers would have to go a big distance to get the fish, perhaps a three weeks' journey from the time they leave here until they get back. If one trawler or two trawlers come back in the week, say a fleet of six, I do not think there would be any danger of flooding the market. That has to be calculated out to a nicety to find out what is the capacity of the market in this country and to find out what quantity each trawler would bring back and so to try to calculate how many trawlers we really should have. However, I think it could be done. I just want to say that I agree with the Minister that there are two points of view and it is very difficult for anybody to be dogmatic about one point of view being right and the other being wrong. I am, on the whole, inclined to think that our fisheries would be developed better and we would be able to help our inshore fishermen better by having a trawler fleet because we would be able to direct our trawler fleet to go to a certain place for a certain type of fish and at a certain time. It would help to make fish consumption more popular. People would be able to get what they wanted and would consume more fish than they would if there were only one variety.

Mr. Dillon

Would the Deputy agree that if we had to choose between deep-sea trawlers and inshore fishermen, we ought to preserve the inshore fishermen?

Dr. Ryan

If I thought there was any danger of injuring the inshore fishermen I would say to cut them out. I think it would not only not injure them, but that it would help us to get the varieties which the inshore fisherment cannot catch. That would keep the consumer satisfied. Otherwise, I think there is the danger that if the consumer cannot get the fish he wants he will begin to ask to have the ports opened to the imported fish. That is the danger.

I am glad to know that the Minister has some hope of establishing a canning industry. I should like to have some more details from him on that. Of course, if the idea is still only in the air, I do not wish to push the Minister further on that point, but if he has more information to give the House on it I should be glad to have it from him when he is concluding.

The problem of protection has, of course, always been a big one on this Estimate. I think there are more complaints made against the Minister for Fisheries and the Fisheries Department on the question of protection than on any other subject. Most people around the coast seem to feel that the fishery laws are not being maintained by the fishery authorities here, and that they are not being observed by the foreign trawlers. I am quite sure that these trawlers do take a run inside the limit occasionally. I do not know if the law is transgressed as often as some people seem to think.

The Minister mentioned the question of exclusive fishery limits. That has being going on for many years between the Government here and the Government in Great Britain. It is universally recognised, as the Minister has said, that no foreign trawler, or British trawler, is permitted to come within three miles of the coast. Naturally, we want to get more than three miles. Many countries have adopted a limit of seven or nine miles and have got it recognised. They are able to enforce it, too. Our object in negotiating with the British Government has always been to get the British Government to recognise a better limit than three miles. We always had hoped that, if the British Government agreed to it, other Governments would follow suit. I should like the Minister, when replying, to give some indication as to whether any progress has been made in these negotiations. The question was being examined, before the present Government took office, by officials on both sides. I would like to know if the examination has concluded, and, if so, whether any recommendations have been made to the two Governments, what these recommendations may be and whether there is any hope that some agreement may be signed between the two Governments in the very near future. I take it there are still complaints about foreign trawlers poaching inside territorial waters. I should like to know whether, in the new situation in which the Department of Defence has taken over the protection of our fisheries, there are less complaints now than when the Department of Fisheries itself was doing the protection work.

Another point that fishermen have put to me is that at the end of the war there was a good lot of fish to be got. With all the danger that was involved in going far afield to fish and with the scarcity of men and boats in other countries—more perhaps than here— there was not so much fishing done during the war. The result was that the number of fish in the sea increased. When the war was over there was a great supply of fish. Our inshore fishermen found it comparatively easy to get a catch. They complained to me recently that they now have to go farther out to get fish and are continually meeting with accidents— whether that is deliberate or not is a matter to be decided—to their nets. The foreign trawlers evidently cut the nets on them. That may be due to accident or it may be by design. I do not know, but it is a matter that should be looked into as to whether those foreign trawlers, as our fishermen allege, are purposely cutting their nets. There should be some way of coming to an arrangement about that.

Now, our inland fisheries are very important, first of all, from the point of view of recreation for our own people, and, secondly, from the point of view of our tourist industry. The Minister said a very true thing when talking about the effect of hatcheries. It is quite true that when some society proceeds to develop a lake or a river by putting some thousands of fry into it, they are not giving very much more than three or four energetic pike will eat up in a year. Experience teaches that, where these hatcheries are, and where you have a society looking after a river or a lake by putting fry into it, the fishing in it improves. If you have a society that is enthusiastic enough to purchase fry and put them into a river or lake it is safe to assume, I think, that the members of it will be enthusiastic enough to protect the river or lake in other ways. I think it would be a great pity to discourage people of that type because I think they are doing good work. If it is a matter of providing the fry for them, I think we should try to do it so that they will continue their good work and help to increase the number of fish in these rivers and lakes.

Protection is most important against the human enemy as well as other enemies. The conservators have the task of protecting the fisheries from poachers or, if you like, from the human marauders. They also have the task of trying to destroy predatory birds and so on. The Minister spoke about carrying out an experiment to try and relate the number of pike, say, to the number of brown trout. I do not know how he is going to do that. It is an experiment that might be useful, but it appears to me to be one that is going to create an infinite amount of trouble, and it may not give any positive results. I think it has been proved beyond yea or nay that the private owner always kept his fishery up-to-date and well stocked by destroying predatory birds and predatory fish. I do not think we are going on the wrong line if we try to keep down the number of pike or the number of cormorants, as the case may be, in our lakes. The Minister's experiment may be useful, but I certainly think we should follow the old practice of destroying these predatory birds and predatory fish. The Minister was afraid that if we killed all the pike, say, in a lake, vegetation would become so good at the bottom that the fish would not come to the top. On the other hand, he thought there would be so many fish that they might get very small. Is it not obvious that a balance would be created some way or other? After all, if there is so much vegetation at the bottom, the fish will get so plentiful that some of them must come up, and then the fisherman can make his catch and things will balance out.

The Minister mentioned that under the Fishery Act, 1939, the State was enabled to take over private ownership in fisheries on the estuaries and the weirs. When does the Minister intend to implement that Act, where is it intended to commence, and in what way does he intend to operate these fisheries when they are taken over? I take it for granted the Minister is in agreement with the legislation passed at that time, when it was provided that the State should take over these private fisheries and operate them. When that legislation was being passed there were suggestions from various Deputies. Some were to the effect that the Department of Fisheries should operate the fisheries; others suggested that having taken them over, the Department should let them, and there were other suggestions that they should make them public fisheries. I should like to hear the Minister's views with regard to the implementation of that Act and how he intends to operate the fisheries when he takes them over.

He referred to netting in fresh water. In the Act it is provided that netting in fresh water would become illegal after a short period. It has now ceased and those who made a livelihood by it are due to receive compensation. I was glad to hear the Minister say that numbers of them already had been compensated. I would urge him to complete the settlement of these men's claims at the earliest possible moment. Everybody will agree that if a man is making a living out of a certain occupation, he cannot afford to wait two, three or four years to get compensation to enable him to enter some other occupation. He must get his money as quickly as possible. I am sure we will all agree with the Minister's sentiment that we should not be too particular about beating these men down to the last farthing. The best thing would be to settle with them and let them go ahead in some other form of livelihood.

When he was referring to the balance between brown trout and their enemies, the Minister spoke of various theories relating to the supply of brown trout in lakes. One was that the number of brown trout was regulated largely by their enemies, and that appears to be a fairly sensible explanation. Another theory had relation to the ph content in the water. I remember when I was in the Department of Fisheries, reading some articles on that subject. As usual, when you have an enthusiast writing on such subjects, he puts such a picture before you that you are inclined to come to the conclusion that if enough phosphates were put into the lakes the waters would be teeming with fish. You always have to discount a certain amount of what the enthusiasts say, but by this time there should be sufficient information collected, and I am sure the Department of Fisheries has done sufficient by way of experiment to give us some idea of the results that would be achieved by putting a certain amount of phosphates or other fertilisers into the water. The main idea was that fertilisers would increase the feeding for the fish and, in that way, the fish supply would be improved.

When I was in the Department of Fisheries I was interested in consolidating the laws, and the Government at that time authorised the consolidation of the whole fishery code. I had many conversations with the draftsman and he told me on the last occasion I conversed with him that he would have a draft prepared early in 1948. I should like to know from the Minister if this draft consolidation of the fishery laws reached him in 1948 and, if so, what does he intend to do. This is a matter which created some speculation at the time. Does he intend to amend the law—because there are amendments necessary—first of all, and then consolidate, or vice versa? Will he bring the Consolidation Bill before the Oireachtas and then, having gone out of here with a clean Act, the only Act on fishery law, will he start to amend it? There are arguments both ways, and I should like to know if the Minister will tell us what are his intentions before he proceeds to put these intentions into operation. There are very cogent arguments on both sides and it is well worth while debating which is the best course to take.

Sir John Esmonde

Frankly, I am disappointed at the decision which the Minister has taken to confine the fishing industry to inshore fishing. I am afraid the speech which I am about to make will be more or less on the same lines as the speeches I have made on several previous occasions in the House. I agree with the Minister and the last speaker and, if the extension of our fishing industry beyond inshore fishing were to do away with inshore fishing, then, of course, I would be against any such extension, but I am not satisfied that the creation of a suitable fishing industry, comparable with the industry that exists in other countries of our size and population, would interfere in any way with the inshore fishing. I agree with Deputy Ryan that it would help. We seem to forget in this country that we have at our shores an enormous potential wealth which foreign visitors and observers from time to time refer to. There was a letter in the latest issue of the Sunday Independent from a Danish visitor. He drew attention to the fact that we have not properly developed that aspect of our fisheries.

I have taken out certain figures to indicate to the Minister and to the House what the situation is in other countries. The suggestion is made in connection with the fishing industry that you can have either an industry based upon part-time fishermen or an industry based upon whole-time fishermen, and it is said that an industry based on whole-time fishermen must inevitably do away with part-time fishermen. Norway has a population of 3,600,000 people. From that point of view it is not very much different from our own country. In Norway there are no less than 112,000 people engaged in fishing. That is the figure given for the year 1945. That is the latest figure that I could get. Of that 112,000 people 38,000 odd have another chief occupation. The inshore fishermen here, who, as we know, are sometimes small farmers or have some other occupation to follow, correspond to the 38,000 odd in Norway. These figures illustrate not only the fact that you can have two types of fishermen working in the industry without doing each other any harm but you also have the stupendous fact that a country with a population only a little larger than our own can employ permanently in the fishing industry over 70,000 people.

The same waters that wash the coast of Norway flow around our shores. It is as easy for our fishermen to reach the fishing beds as it is for the Norwegian fishermen. Denmark has a population of 4,000,000. Three or four years ago—these are the latest figures I can get—the fish landed in that country were valued at £5,000,000. Iceland has a population less than the average Irish county, 121,000 people. In 1945, Iceland landed fish to the value of £5,300,000, of which £380,000 was in reference to herrings. It may be said that there are some differences in climate and so on between our country and Iceland and Norway. Let me take Great Britain. What do we find there? In the year 1947—the latest year for which I can get figures —£41,000,000 worth of fish was landed, representing 993,000 tons. If one wishes to carve that figure up still further and take an area and a population more approximate to our own, then one can take Scotland. Scotland in the year 1947 landed 229,000 tons of fish valued at £10,507,000.

Taking our own country in the years 1942 and 1947, inclusive, the best figures that I can get are 316,000 cwts. of fish, or 15,800 tons, with a value in money of £547,000. From these figures I think it is evident that we are neglecting a very, very valuable industry. I know there are differences of opinion on this matter, but I think those differences must be resolved in favour of making our fishing industry one of the foremost industries in the country when one considers that there is no other single country whose shores are washed with the same waters that does not indulge in this industry to its fullest extent.

I have not quoted the figures for France. I do not think it is necessary to do so. We have all seen the pictures of the blessing of the fleet in Brittany. We know that the French fishing fleet is enormous. We know that it comes as far as our own coast and that it is sometimes the subject matter of dispute when our territorial waters are entered.

It may be said that there is a difficulty with regard to boats. But what did Belgium do? Belgium has a coastline of about 75 miles, together with the inlet of the river Scheldt down to Antwerp. In 1945 Belgium had a fleet of 11,260 tons. Belgium had been occupied and had gone through the war. She was faced with many problems in 1945. She had to build her roads, her bridges and her houses. Yet in 1946 she had built up in one year her fishing fleet to 23,179 tons. If Belgium finds it worth while to keep and maintain a fleet of that size in the restricted area she has, surely it would be worth our while to consider the question of developing this industry. I understand that one of the objections to its development is that there will be too much fish for consumption. Fish has other uses besides being consumed at the family table. It can be canned. It has even further uses, the importance of which these countries fully recognise. If we were to wake up to-morrow and discover that underneath one of our mountains or one of our bogs there were vast deposits of mineral wealth this House would be unanimous in voting large sums of money for the exploitation of that untapped wealth. The position with regard to the fish around our shores, within distance of our fleets, if we had them, is comparable, in my submission, to such untold mineral wealth suddenly discovered.

We have this important item of potential wealth at our doors. We have an item that would be a dollar earner, a hard currency earner, and yet we are prepared to neglect it. In fact, we are prepared to disregard it, on the basis, as the Minister says, that it would interfere with our way of life. We are going to have a plan for the reclamation of waste land, a plan which I welcome and which is a good one, but what about a plan for the creation of a proper fishing industry? I put that proposition to the Minister. Let him and his advisers take the advice of persons engaged in this industry in the countries to which I have referred. I think a scheme under which a substantial sum of money would be devoted to the creation of an industry comparable to that in existence in Norway, Iceland and to a lesser extent in Denmark, Belgium, England and Scotland would be very well worth while. The position is very unsatisfactory here. That is not the fault of any particular Government but I think since the inception of this State and since we gained control of the economic life of this country, this question of developing the fishing industry on a proper basis has been more or less by-passed by each successive Government. I do not think there is a proper appreciation of the wealth or the benefits that would accrue from developing the industry in this country.

I know the officials in the Department of Fisheries are very excellent people doing their best, but it is only a small Department. It is only a branch, in fact it is only a section, although nominally a Department in itself, of the Department of Agriculture, and even in its own sphere it is hampered and restricted. I understand that there are at least 100 persons on the waiting list—and if those who apply to the Sea Fisheries Association are included there are more— who could be considered as real live applicants for boats and gear. The rate at which boats are being built is, I understand, very slow—probably four or five boats a year—and the requirements of these 100 people, together with those of others who will come on the list from time to time, will never be met. It is a dreadful situation. It is not the Minister's fault, the Government's fault nor the fault of the last Government. It is entirely due to the fact that we are not sufficiently fishminded in this country. We are not sufficiently conscious of the terrific wealth that lies at our doors if the industry were properly organised. Even in the restricted sense in which the industry operates at the moment, confined as it is to inshore fishermen and to the sons of fishermen who wish to start in the business, many of these people will have to wait six months, 12 months, two years or more, before they can be furnished with the necessary boats and tackle. Does it not amount to this: That we have entirely overlooked this industry and that until we become conscious of its importance and its necessity to our economic life, we shall get nowhere?

All around my constituency there are little harbours and piers built from time to time. One by one they are falling into disrepair. When the question arises of having them repaired, you are faced with two propositions. The first proposition is that if a certain amount of money is spent on a particular harbour, either for dredging, building a wall or some work of that kind, you are not going to get any return because there are not enough people in that district engaged in the industry. But if the harbour were right and the boats were right, the fish are there and there would be enough people in the industry. The point then arises that, supposing it is considered an economic proposition to expend some money in this way, you find yourself up against the difficulty that there are about three different Departments concerned. The Minister for Agriculture, as the person in charge of the Department of Fisheries, has to consult with the Board of Works and the county council and perhaps with other bodies.

The mere fact that there is such difficulty in keeping all the tools and the raw material, if I may use that expression in connection with harbours and boats, in full working order, the fact that there is such difficulty in connection with inshore fishermen alone, illustrates beyond all doubt that it is necessary to put the fishing industry on a broader and wider basis. I should like to see a separate Minister in charge of that particular Department. After all, if we could even reach 50 per cent. of Norway's output, we would have over 50,000 men in gainful employment in this country in an industry that will not occupy a square inch of our soil, other than the ground needed for the necessary harbour facilities and the necessary factory facilities for dealing with the fish landed. I make this plea to the Minister in all good faith. I have made it practically every year since I came to the Dáil and I make it again to the present Minister, as I say, in all good faith. I say that he has as valuable an asset for development in the fishing industry as he has in the very excellent plan which he proposes to put into operation for the reclamation of the waste lands of this country.

Mr. Carter

I cannot speak with the experience of Deputy Sir John Esmonde, but I think he made an excellent speech for the development of the fisheries of this country. I represent a few fresh water fishermen, probably in or around 50, on the reaches of the Shannon north of Athlone and if what I hear to-day is true or if any person is serious about putting these suggestions into effect, these people will be deprived of their livelihood. There was an inquiry a fortnight, three weeks or a month ago —I do not know the dates—and I thought that the findings of that inquiry would be in the hands of the local Deputies, but I have not got them. These people are being deprived of fishery rights at the moment. Mind you, I think there was a time when they should have applied for compensation, but I suppose they were strong-headed enough to think that they could carry on and, by carrying on, support their wives and families. Their wives and families will be in a bad way in the future. I am disappointed that the findings of that inquiry are not in the hands of the local Deputies. I expected that this would be on to-day and I suppose I should have gone to the Department of Fisheries and found out all about it.

These people are real fishermen. They cannot take an eel less than ½ lb. and they cannot take an eel of ½ lb. either. It is the contention of the experts in the Department of Fisheries that if an eel they catch is let go, he will live again, but the fishermen say "no". I do not know who is right. I am told by a very reliable authority, a man who has fished in the fishing waters in Norway that Sir John Esmonde spoke about, that any fish with a hook in him will die. I believe that myself and I think everyone else would agree with me, but the contention is that that is not true. I advised these people, if they get compensation —they cannot be deprived of their right to a living—to take it. I do not know whether they will accept my advice or not; they did not vote for me the last time. The reason they did not vote for me was that fishery inspectors came down and had a fight with them. Deputy Dr. Ryan was in charge at that time and it was like the invasion of Normandy. Man dear, the fight went on for the whole day and only that there was a decent sergeant, somebody would have been killed. My colleague, the Minister for Justice, has, I think, also advised them to take it. If they do not, I would say that they are foolish.

I am living on the banks of a river and I believe it was one of the best rivers for salmon. The old people told me. It is the River Inny, where Leo Casey wrote that valiant song, The Rising of the Moon. The salmon were thick coming up but now there are none at all. The river wants to be silted, as it is all dirt and filth and no clean fish will live in it. It would be easy to clean that river, and it would be a great addition to the State to breed good fish. There are big perch in it and they are as bad as big pike. There is a man there who does not allow anyone to fish even for rough fish—I suppose he thinks every man would poach. He has the rights from Ballynacarrigy to Lough Ree. There is no use in talking to him; he will not allow anyone to fish unless he was a soldier of the British Army, and surely I am taboo there. I do not want to dwell very long on that, but I would like it very much if the Minister could give some idea of what he is going to do with these people. Every night at the week-end when I go home I have them whether they voted for me or not. I think it would be very well if they got compensation and I hope they would be wise enough to accept it. I also hope that the Department of Fisheries will see to that river and clear it of rough fish because there was grand trout and salmon in that river. I hope the Department will also take into consideration the very sound advice that Deputy Sir John Esmonde has given. He is a man of experience who has travelled very far and gained much knowledge. I would like to see fishing thriving and I hope it will.

Mr. S. Collins

I find myself in complete and absolute disagreement with the Minister on one aspect of this fishing problem. I do not know where the fallacy was conceived, but I am completely convinced that it is a fallacy and a dangerous fallacy for the Minister to believe that it is impossible for deep-sea trawl fishing to exist side by side with inshore fishing. I am absolutely convinced that there is ample room for both of them and that there is an industrial and employment potential in deep-sea fishing to which the Minister will ultimately have to direct his mind if he is going to preserve the way of life of any section of the population, particularly in areas of my constituency such as Castletown-bere. The Minister has made a suggestion that deep-sea trawling was the weird and ghoulish entity that would consume the inshore fishermen in its onward sweep. I do not believe that and, what is more, I am going to say what I honestly believe. I do not believe that the inshore fisherman is pulling his weight half as much as he should in this industry. I have had some fairly considerable connection with fishing and some very considerable experience to the extent of trying the experiment of going out with these fishermen myself and doing a bit of work. I find that the mentality of the inshore fisherman militates against having a full supply of fish for the home market because he is inclined to work only to the extent that will make his position for the winter secure and is not inclined to go beyond that. He does enough work to satisfy his needs and is inclined to stop at that. I do not for one moment believe, and I do not think any Deputy in this House can believe, that the full market for fish has ever been tapped. I know for a positive fact that there are homes in this country where there never was fish other than salt fish and that is an absolutely deporable condition when one considers, with the development of transport facilities, how easy it is to transport fish, even in a rough iced condition, to any part of this country. I hear people talking about the domestic market. I do not believe that the home market has ever in the history of government in this country been adequately supplied. I do not believe that the Department of Fisheries knows what the home market is and I certainly do not believe that they ever made any real conscientious effort to develop it to the fullest extent.

We have heard in this House a series of complaints of the incidence of cost, particularly in the butchering trade. We have a ready and effective substitute to offer at a more reasonable price, if we go the right way about it— because fish, according to medical experts, is just as nutritious and just as valuable as any meat. There is no difficulty, to my mind, in making this country itself fish-minded, making it have an appreciation of the variety, the quality and the edibility of fish. There is no difficulty about getting down to the fact that we can base in this country a trawling industry that will be able to use and absorb glut catches in more ways than one. People talk of gluts as if it necessitated leaving fish either to rot or to be dumped back into the sea. People seem to forget all the various processes and various subsidiary industries that exist in other countries in relation to fish. You can smoke it; you can can it; you can, by the development of any type of reasonable cold storage facilities, carry it over a glut period into some of the lacuna periods that the Minister is talking about. You can divert certain types of fish, that might be uneconomic in other ways, to certain meal processes that would be useful and would find a ready market.

The one thing that this industry in this country has suffered from—and I am directing the Minister's attention to it deliberately—is that ideas a little too conservative and a little bit too archaic are allowed to permeate the official mind with regard to this problem. The Minister has told us here to-day—and I believe that he himself believes what he says is feasible—that he is going to form this inshore fishery body into a complete co-operative unit, that he is going to have the Sea Fisheries Association guarantee certain prices for certain types of fish and that, with the exception of a certain period when whiting might be running very plentiful, the inshore fisherman will have a guaranteed price and, when fish is not plentiful and he cannot go out for fish, he, in these lacuna periods, is going to buy fish. I would like to ask the Minister where he is going to buy it.

The Minister does not seem to realise that, dealing with the problem of fish at the moment and with all its trawling experience and with all its trawlers in the sea, the British fleets are not able to supply their own market. Even the foreign fish sold in England does not supply the full requirements of that market. How does this Minister anticipate in these lacuna periods being able to buy fish in any great quantity to fill the gap? I think it is a pitiful admission of failure, if you have to admit that you must build your industry in such a way as to give you lacuna periods.

The Minister should keep his mind open on the question of the interlocking of the two types of fishing. I would be very sorry to see the income derived by many of the small farmers who are also inshore fishermen in any way jeopardised, but I do not think that the development of deep-sea trawling would jeopardise it, if the development of deep-sea trawling is done on the following basis. Let the inshore fisherman have the run at your market, let him supply it to the extent that he is able; let your deep-sea trawler fill the gap to give the market its full supply, let the deep-sea trawler ensure that you will not have lacuna periods and that you will have the material for the canning industry apparently envisaged by the Minister. They will be able to build up a supply of fish also for introduction into the various fish meals that can be made a lucrative adjunct to any fishing industry.

The Minister must realise now that there is here a very ready and continuous solution to the unemployment question. There is a huge employment potential in the fishing industry. It mainly consists of the fact that, apart from people who may be engaged in the actual manning of the trawlers and the working of the trawlers themselves, all the various subsidiary industries will require personnel. They will be managed by a few experts and, in general, the workers can be recruited in the normal way in any country district. The Minister will have to realise this and have to keep his mind open on the problem. I can inform him now, even though he himself may be convinced that the inshore fisherman does not usually turn to trawling, that the position exists at the moment that one of the biggest trawling companies of the world, Yeolands of Grimsby, have more Castletownbere and West Cork men managing their trawlers, who were formerly inshore fishermen, than they have of any other nationality. The mind of the younger man in that area is turning to fishing as a full-time occupation, because the conditions in the trawlers are good, the wages are high, the catch bonus is high, the employment is constant and there are regular holiday periods. The younger man growing up who has gone into the trawling service finds it is a steadier and less arduous type of life than his father had before him in trying to augment the earnings of the small farm by earnings in fishing.

The Minister need not have any fears on the ground that you have not the material in this country that will man your trawling fleets, just the same as you might have the material that will man your inshore boats. I want the Minister to keep his mind open on this problem, because fishing will never be developed on a proper basis here until somebody realises that these two types of fishing can exist together, can be worked effectively together and, above all, can become a real national wealth, both from the point of view of the earning capacity of the industry itself and from the point of view that we can keep in gainful employment and based at home in this country many of our boys who are now serving in the trawling fleets of Grimsby and of the other English companies around the English coast.

The problem is a simple one. I think we have become a little bit too Sea Fisheries Association minded in this country. The Sea Fisheries Association itself, with all the goodwill in the world has not got the broadness of vision that it will require. I think that the association, if it had a certain breadth of vision, could see that, even within itself, it could extend to build a co-operativism between the deep-sea fishing and the inshore fishing that would lead to harmony as well as to profit, that it itself could become the nucleus and the driving power to guide the complete coalescing of the two types of fishing into harmonious profit to the nation.

What is really wrong in this country is that, by being over-anxious to preserve the inshore fishermen to the exclusion of trawling, we are ultimately sealing the doom of the fishing industry here altogether. It is bigger than a home market; it can be made infinitely bigger than the home market. The position at the moment is that the home market itself is under-developed and certainly never filled. Drive from Dublin to my constituency any Friday and it will be a miracle if, in the towns of Maryborough, Cashel or Cahir, you can get a bit of fish—at first-class hotels. They can give you a poached egg or a bit of meat. And then people talk seriously to me about the inshore fishermen supplying the home market! It is quite possible that they could supply the home market, but somebody requires to revise completely the idea of what the home market is and to bring up to date in the Fisheries Department the system of marketing. In view of the distance of any place in this country from the sea and from a fishing port, it should be possible for fresh fish to be put into practically every provincial town at least three times a week. That is not done, as we all know, and none of us will blind himself to the fact.

How is it to be done? I heard the Minister talking for a long time about travelling creameries and co-operative creamery systems. Is there any reason why the developing of the marketing of fish should not be done through branches of co-operative societies or by means of various types of transport which have to go in a broad general way amongst the rural community. I am convinced that if fresh fish was available at many of the branch creameries or at the creamery centres to the ordinary rural dweller, it would be bought very readily and I think the time has come, not for experimentation with the balance between brown trout and coarse fish in the rivers, but for experimenting to find a way to get fresh fish into the home of any person who wants it. There are many people who, no matter how they look for fresh fish, are very fortunate if they can get it more than four or five times a year.

I have listened to arguments put up by fishing organisations against deep-sea trawling and have got pamphlets and documents from them. I do not think that any of them have got down to a real analysis of what is the potential of fishing in this country. The richest harvest around our shores is the silver fish in the sea. Anybody who wishes can travel with me the road from Glengarriff to Castletown-bere and he will see there evidence, absolutely incontrovertible, of how good are the fishing grounds around that coast. Spaniards, Danes and Frenchmen—the flags of every nationality under the sun are to be seen on trawlers there, and they are not there for the good of their health. If a Frenchman or Spaniard can incur all the overheads of a journey from his base to the Fastnet to get a catch of fish, how much more profitable should it be for the Irishman within six or seven miles of the fishing ground?

Look at the reality of the situation, I say, and say very earnestly to the Minister. These people can travel long distances and can afford to stay out from their home ports for long periods and, with only a medium catch, as some of the skippers have told me, can show a very considerable profit. An Irish trawling fleet would not have these long distances to travel and would not have to stay out for long periods. They would not have the same overheads but they would be in a position to compete very effectively with any country in the world if we got down to a realisation that fishing could be built into as big an industry as agriculture. It could, within the limits of reason, be developed to the point at which it could be as profitable to the country, from an export point of view as well as from the home market point of view, as agriculture. It could be made an industry with a turnover of £6,000,000 or £7,000,000 a year.

People may think I am mad and I suppose anybody who has the courage to be progressive is usually dubbed mad, but if smaller countries than this, countries with fewer facilities and not so well placed geographically, without the advantage of proximity to certain runs of fish that come at periods of the year, can make this industry a tremendously lucrative industry, why cannot we who are searching for a way to stem emigration and to kill unemployment, get to grips with the whole problem of a fishing industry and explore its potentials? With certain constituents of mine, I went to see the Minister and I was given a long lecture on the inshore fisherman, on his many qualities, his way of life, and so on. I was thoroughly appreciative of all that, but I was not convinced then, and I am still seeking somebody who can convince me, that it is not possible for these two types of fishermen to work together, as they could work together. So much for that aspect of fishing.

I come down now to the mundane realities of the situation as it is. The Minister expressed fond hopes that, at the end of this financial year, many of the applicants on the waiting list for boats, gear and tackle would be dealt with. I want to ask a very direct question: how many boats can we expect in West Cork in the coming year and when can we expect the first boat? The Minister may recollect that he made a certain promise to me, following a deputation, and I should like to know now when we may expect the first welcome incursion of new boats into our fishing fleet in West Cork. I should like to know also if he proposes to develop the boat yards at Baltimore to a higher capacity and if his representations to the Minister for Industry and Commerce with regard to electric power in these boatyards have been successful. I should like to know further how soon he hopes to have this co-operativism which he has envisaged for the Sea Fisheries Association completed and where he proposes to buy the fish to fill the lacuna periods.

I may have sounded critical of the Minister, but my criticism is not a criticism of any specific Minister. My criticism is that we have not yet got down to tackling fishing in its proper concept. I think we are inclined to hit and run in the matter of fishing, which I feel should be and could be as important as agriculture, and which should have in the Department as much significance as wheat growing, cattle feeding or any other branch of agriculture. It can be made a ready and positive source of wealth and I would not be doing my duty if I did not urge that it is a problem which still needs much exploration and that it is too soon yet to shut the door against a double-edged or double feature fishing industry.

In so far as the Estimate shows substantial increases in the money made available for the provision of boats, tackle and engines for inshore fishermen, I welcome it. I want to see the Minister as rapidly as possible putting the inshore fishermen in the best possible position to do the job they are meant to do. I want to see them getting every facility the country can provide for them, and if an increase in these facilities will make life better for the hard worker who has to farm his few acres and try to farm the many acres of the sea, this House should commend and wish God speed to them. I earnestly urge the Minister to get down to the job now, so that, in the coming year, he can come before the Oireachtas with a well-balanced plan for taking the fishing industry out of the category of a £500,000 a year industry and putting it quickly in the category of a £6,000,000 a year national asset.

Mr. Bartley

In my opinion, there are far more people in the country interested in the nationalisation of inland fisheries than there are persons interested in any other form of nationalisation that has taken place or that is about to take place. Nearly always, the popular comment about people who own private fisheries is adverse. There is never the same adverse comment about private monopoly of transport, electricity, or anything else. For that reason, the contrast which the Estimates show between the treatment of people who, quite voluntarily, for reasons of sport, or some other reason, foster fisheries who make no profit out of them and who can get only very meagre grants for the provision of hatcheries and suchlike work, and the treatment of the boards of conservators, most of whom have a financial interest in the fisheries, is very unwelcome. There is an increase in the grant to boards of conservators of £500 as compared with last year whereas a very fine undertaking, the Corrib hatchery at Oughterard, which was established by Galway and Lough Corrib, Anglers' Association, get the miserly grant of £10. They have done trojan work to restock Lough Corrib, which is the largest sheet of water in the country which provides free fishing. That contrast is not at all complimentary to us as a Parliament. I do not want to lay the blame entirely on the Government. We all should unite our voices in asking that the people who are showing a praiseworthy interest in the development of inland fisheries should be encouraged by better financial assistance than they have been receiving.

I want now to discuss the estuarine fisheries. They give good employment to a large number of men in my constituency. I never could understand why the Sea Fisheries Association, which goes to so much trouble to organise the ordinary sea fishermen, has always excluded these men. They are left to the mercy of the dealers in salmon. I am not saying that they have been crushed entirely by these dealers but the point I want to make is that if the Sea Fisheries Association provided for these men the facilities that are provided for other fishermen, the lot of these men would be improved enormously.

For instance, in each estuary or convenient area along the coast, they could organise the local fishermen and give them the facilities they require to carry on their trade. The first essential would be the provision of nets. At present, nets are provided for them by the people who buy the fish and so much per pound of salmon is deducted, and out of the fund thus created the men are provided with nets which, of course, as far as I understand, remain the property of the person who finances it.

There is a fairly big difference between the price the men get for their salmon and the price salmon fetches on the Dublin or English markets. I make the plea that the Sea Fisheries Association should see to it, that these fishermen are organised so that they can get, to the fullest possible extent, the benefit of the price which the fish makes when it is sold in Dublin or England. That would represent a very considerable improvement in income for these men. Having said so much about it, I leave it to the consideration of the Minister and the Department.

The Minister referred to the inshore fishermen who complain of failure to sell their catch at certain times of the year and he said that they had no cause for complaint if they supplied— the words he used were "the market that they themselves elect to overload". After all, these inshore fishermen have no choice. The problem is part and parcel of the old question that was discussed here last year and that has been referred to by a far larger number of speakers this year than I have heard in my experience in this House. It is the question of the inshore fishermen versus the deep-sea trawler. Everybody knows that the equipment which our inshore fishermen have does not enable them to fish in all weathers and in all places. They have to go by the weather and fish within a fairly confined area. Are these men to be blamed if, being restricted in that way, they fish when they can and where they can? The solution, as other speakers have suggested here to-night, is to have a complementary fishing arm. I spoke about it last year and the Minister pooh-poohed it. I was very pleased to hear so many Deputies supporting that suggestion as enthusiastically as they have done this evening.

I, too, am all for the inshore man. We have been treating inshore fishing for a long time more or less as a social service. Years ago, loans were issued and, after a lapse of time, when the loans could not be repaid, an Act was passed to revise the loans. A great many of them were wiped out. Therefore, I think I am justified in saying that we have been regarding inshore fishing more or less as a social service. If our main consideration is simply to keep these fishermen going as they have been going almost from time immemorial, without any ideas of expanding the numbers engaged and without reference to the supplying of our own home market with fish, I take it that that is a confession that we have no policy in the matter and that we have no aim other than that of continuing this method of maintaining a small fishing community. I want to support those speakers who have spoken to-night and who have advocated a change of mind on the part of the Minister and who have indicated that this country should emulate other small countries who have made their fishing industry a very profitable one. Last year I was bold enough to make a suggestion as to how that might be done. I have not heard it referred to by anybody this evening nor, I think, did anybody refer to it last year other than myself. It is that the development of that type of fishing might be turned over to our naval service. There is no reason why we should not acquire a number of boats of a large size. They would serve, incidentally, as training ships for the men who join the naval service. There would, too, be a more complete control over them than there would be in the case of a privately-owned trawling company. I do not think we are ever likely to see a privately-owned trawling company coming into existence unless it is substantially financed in its initial stages by the State and unless the people who operate it are guaranteed against loss by the State. I do not think that that is an arrangement any Government in this country should enter into. If it cannot be established in any way other than by the assistance of the State it should be done entirely by the State and, most appropriately in my opinion, be handed over to the naval service. Then, if you have your inshore fleet supplying your home market reasonably well it is quite easy to keep your larger ships in port. Then when—because of weather conditions or for any other reason—there is a fall in the catches of the inshore fishermen, these others are always there to supply not alone the country's needs but, if there is a good market outside, to expand our exports.

That may be a very half-baked idea but I think there are people in the country who would support it. Whether it is a good idea or otherwise, we ought—seeing that we are now trying to induce our young men to become sea-minded—to have a second arm to our naval service and I believe it would attract a larger number than are now going into the naval service. After a period of training we could release them. They could go back to their own areas and they would be better marks for the attentions of the Sea Fisheries Association in the allocation of their boats later on. Along the coast, where the inshore tradition has been kept alive, we require to train a large number of the young men who are growing up and some means will have to be found of getting them to take an interest in the sea.

On the question of the increased provision of money for advances for boats and gear and general development, I should like to ask the Minister two questions. What type of boat is it intended to provide? Are we going to get a larger boat than has heretofore been provided and can the Minister give us an approximate idea as to the distribution of these boats? When I ask him about the distribution of these boats I ask him to tell us where the applicants on the waiting list are located. Will he allocate the available boats this year fairly reasonably around the coast? I want to make one very serious complaint in this regard. As far as I recollect, County Galway has practically the largest membership in the Sea Fisheries Association. It has also the unenviable record of having received the lowest number of boats— in any event, of all the counties with a large membership of the Sea Fisheries Association. That situation should be remedied. There is a fairly substantial increase this year but I do not suppose it will go as far as it would have gone, say, pre-war when costs were lower. I know that the cost of boats and equipment has gone up but, whatever number may be provided this year, I think I am entitled—in view of the present position in regard to the distribution of boats and the membership of the association—to make a very strong plea that County Galway will not be ignored as it has been in the past. I should also like to repeat an opinion that I have often expressed. It is not altogether my opinion; it is based on the opinions of the men who have to go to sea. It is that the standard type of boat— I know it is not now rigidly adhered to by the association—is not at all suitable for the west coast and a larger boat should be provided.

The sum of £13,000 for general development is not very large. I am surprised to hear the Minister say that it is now intended to re-establish the boat yard at Meevagh which was discarded. There is a boat yard in Killybegs and that particular boat yard replaced Meevagh. Now the Minister says that it is intended to reopen the boat yard at Meevagh. I do not object to giving the Donegal fishermen all the facilities it is possible to give them, but what I do say is—and my remarks in this connection are on a par with what I said about the distribution of boats—that the distribution of the facilities should be equitable. Why have two boat yards in one county while you have the whole west coast from Donegal to Kerry without any boat yard? If you are going to establish a second one, why not establish it either in Mayo or Galway? I think that is a very reasonable request to make. I have no doubt that a second boat yard would be very welcome and required in Donegal, but it might be left over until the next time this type of development takes place.

The question of boat yards has a very close relationship with the question of harbour works generally. Deputy Esmonde made a plea on which he was on a very solid ground, and I want to support him. I think we should raise a large sum of money— and there is no reason why we should not ask the people to lend that money as we have for other purposes—(1) to repair the damage done to existing harbour works and (2) to provide new ones where they are required. A great deal of damage was done in the winter of 1942 by a very high tide that struck Western Europe. Some very important piers and harbours in this country were practically destroyed by that high tide and they are still lying derelict because the county councils are unable or unwilling to provide money to repair them. In view of the high rates which now prevail, the county councils have a very good case to make. Having carried out a survey of the work to be done, the State ought to make it a special job to provide the money necessary to repair these works and provide new ones all round the coast.

While the exports of demersal and other fish have increased satisfactorily in 1948 over 1947, I was very much disappointed to see that there was a very heavy falling off in the value of the takings of crayfish, escallops and lobsters. I have had complaints that we have not been given in Galway the number of boats to which the organised membership entitles us. From this type of fish, however, we have always been able to make a nice income in the summer season. The cray-fishing industry was established by Frenchmen here. It was down on its luck during the war, but one would expect it to be showing signs of improvement now. There was a drop in the value of the takings of crayfish from £7,315 in 1947 to £2,886 in 1948. In escallops, there was a drop from £7,636 in 1947 to £4,198 in 1948. The drop in the value of lobsters taken was from £34,406 in 1947 to £27,327 in 1948. I am not putting that down to neglect on the part of the Department of Fisheries, but I should like to be given some information as to why that is so. What is responsible for this very heavy drop in this type of fishing which is particularly advantageous to the people on the west coast?

We have not the same advantages in regard to other forms of fishing. We have not got boats such as they have on the east and south coast, or a chance of making a decent income by taking demersal fish. But this was a sort of speciality in the west and it is a pity to see it falling off. I know that one very good bay in Galway for fishing for escallops was over-fished some years ago, but it was given a rest for the last couple of years and I am wondering if fishing in that bay cannot be resumed again. As to cray fishing, I do not know why it should have fallen off. One Frenchman who was interned or unable to come back during the war is back for the last couple of years, and there is another Frenchman, I understand, in the south of Ireland who has been following up cray fishing since the end of the war. We were expecting that this fishing would increase rather than decrease.

I want to make a plea for the officials of the Sea Fisheries Association. I do not know why they have been left without a pension scheme up to this. I think that they are the only officials employed by a State-subsidised organisation who have not got a pension scheme. The Minister, the Department and the directors of the association ought to give that matter some attention.

On the question of quick freezing, I should like to put to the Minister the very exceptional position that exists in the Aran Islands. It is not easy to transport fish at suitable times from the islands. The Dun Aengus only makes the trip to the islands once a week and that day may not always be suitable for despatching fish. If the question of the marketing of the fish from the Aran Islands can be solved by the establishment of this quick-freeze process there, I would ask that the matter be considered. The Aran islanders and people situated like them around the coast are very often able to take very considerable catches of fish, but, when they get them on to the islands, they are faced with this difficulty which during the war was insuperable. If this quick-freeze process would solve it, I make a plea that it be considered in connection with the location of these plants around the coast. Finally, I want to ask when the report of the committee of inquiry which the Minister set up last year will be available and, if it is available to him at present, when is it intended to publish it.

Mr. O'Gorman

As a result of the speeches made on this Estimate, I feel that it is the intention of members on all sides of the House that there will be no necessity in future for the insertion in the local papers of that slogan we have been reading for many years: "Eat more fish." It is refreshing to find the unanimity that exists amongst Deputies that something should be done for the fishing industry. It was heartening to me to hear the Minister inform the House that it is his intention during the current year to spend a sum of £86,000 more than last year. The sum is a reasonably large one, but I do not think it is large enough, considering the lucrative harvest that can be got from the sea by spending a larger amount of money.

I will not say the fisheries in this country have been sadly neglected since the inception of this State, but certainly they have never been pushed forward as they might have been. I would like to see the Minister do a little more for the fishermen than has been done up to the present time. I realise, of course, that during the war it was very hard to get boats of the standard and style made to stand up to the south-westerly gales that rage around the west and southern coasts of Ireland. However, now that things are coming back to normal, I hope that as year succeeds year the Minister will expedite the getting of boats for fishermen.

The particular locality from which I come, the South of Ireland, is fringed by one of the finest sea fishing grounds in Europe; that is the sea-line from Roche's Point to Ardmore Head. Ballycotton, which is included in that area, is renowned amongst fishermen all over the world. I think I am in disagreement with the Minister somewhat. If the fishermen of Ballycotton could get a larger type of boat than they have been used to fishing from for many years they would bring far more fish into their port for distribution throughout the country. In my own town of Youghal we have a considerable fishing community, those hardy toilers of the deep, men who make a very hazardous and dangerous living for many months of the year at the mouth of the Blackwater and extending out into Youghal Bay. When the salmon season finishes in the month of July the outlook for many of these men is somewhat gloomy until February comes around again. The vast majority of them are really fishermen by profession and there is nothing open to them during the ensuing months but to go to the unemployment exchange and draw the dole. They do not want to do that. I know, and I hope to impress on the Minister—big-minded man that he is, I am sure he will be generous where men like these are concerned—that if he, through the Sea Fisheries Association, could give two or three boats to these men which would employ 12, 15 or 20 men during the intervening months of the salmon season it would be a veritable godsend for all those people. As I say, we have some of the finest fishermen in Ireland along that coast—Ballycotton, Youghal, Roche's Point and Gyleen— men who have been brought up in an atmosphere of fishing. Unfortunately, however, the vast majority of them have not got the finance to put into boats.

I would respectfully suggest to the Minister that he should recommend his Department to make a survey of those localities and see if he could help men who are willing to work and work at a very dangerous livelihood. I heard the Minister state in his opening speech that there is a long waiting list for boats. Materials are now getting somewhat more plentiful than for many years and I hope that when next year comes along we will not have a long waiting list of boats and that anybody who wants a boat will get it.

There seems to be some danger of gluts of fish. I suggest that a glut of fish is a good thing but we do not want gluts of fish if we have nowhere to preserve them. May I suggest that at various parts of our coasts the Minister should instal canning factories. Naturally, I should like to see one installed in my own town where there was a very thriving canning factory in days gone by. Times have changed but I do feel that the people of this country are becoming more fish-minded again than they have been for many years past. Deputy Collins, I think, referred to the paucity of fish in many of the inland towns in Ireland. I agree with him there. I do not see any reason at all why any of the larger towns throughout the Midlands, where people through religious persuasion eat fish on Friday, should not be able to get fresh fish. Many have to import from places like Tramore and Ballycotton and there should be no necessity for that. I think that in modern times when vans can travel 150 miles over the country no town in Ireland should be left without fish on such a day.

Take the sprat industry. There is a colossal amount of money in sprats. In my own town of Youghal, last year, during August and September it gladdened the heart of every townsman there to see up to 80 or 100 men employed day after day boxing sprats— to see those boxes loaded, as they say, up to the gunwale with sprats coming in from Youghal Bay—packing them and sending them off to the various preservative houses in this country and putting them into cold storage. The time came when there was no room for the sprats in the storage premises and the men could not go on bringing in any more. Increasing the volume of the storage required for the preservation of fish in this country is a thing the Minister might look into.

Deputy Sir John Esmonde gave a very lucid and comprehensive survey of what the fish industry means to the various countries throughout the world. He mentioned Norway, Iceland, Belgium and France. I do not see, at all, why we should not have a fishing fleet of our own in this country. The Minister at the moment does not seem amenable to that suggestion judging by his opening utterances, but I hope that as a result of what the speakers have said in the House this afternoon he will bear it in mind and when he introduces his Estimate next year that he will announce to the House that he is forming a fishing fleet. Naturally it is a great change for us. I believe that the people of this country are acquiring a greater taste for fish than they had in days gone by. Perhaps in our young days when we visited our relations in the country we were delighted to be served with dried cod. There was nothing nicer and nothing would give a greater crispness to our appetites than to get some of that served up to us in the days when we were younger.

The Minister mentioned the question of the protection of our fishery beds. I do not think sufficient attention is paid to the preservation of the fishery beds along our coasts. I am referring to the whole coast of Ireland. I saw with my own two eyes during last summer around the months of June, July, August, September and October hordes of French fishing trawlers. They came along from Roche's Point to Ballycotton, where I told you a few minutes ago the finest sea fishing ground in Europe is, right on into Youghal Bay and right on to Ardmore and Dungarvan. They absolutely ruined the grounds. They came in there under cover of the darkness showing no lights, dropped their nets and literally tore from the fishing ground every type of fish. Now, knowing the Minister, I feel certain that he will pass on what I have said to his Department. It is not my desire to throw any further work on the Department because I realise that every Government Department has quite enough to do. This is a case, however, where night after night the finest fishing ground in the world is being torn to pieces. I have no doubt that the Minister will attend to this.

There is another thing which is causing a vast amount of damage to our fishing grounds throughout the country. I refer to the destruction of fish by cormorants or, as they are known to myself and people who live by the seaside, the "big black divers". According to the local fishermen, each cormorant can devour up to two stone of fish in a day. I have seen them myself devouring a plaice weighing up to three or four pounds. I do not know how they got it down. I suggest that these cormorants are causing terrific havoc not only along the coast of the South of Ireland, but all over the coast of the country. They just come into our harbours and bays. I think that, if the Minister could devise some means of destroying these birds, he would be conferring a great favour on our fishermen. The only place to get at them is in their breeding places. They breed in the rocky places at Cable Island and elsewhere. Thousands and thousands of them are bred there. Something should be done to destroy them. They go up along the Blackwater and they do a tremendous amount of damage. This is a matter that the Minister might give his attention to.

I am firmly convinced that there is a potential of enormous value in our fishing industry. If all the money that is in it could be got out of it, it would certainly bring great happiness and contentment into the homes of our people who make their living from it. We are all glad, when the harvest time comes in August, to see the corn ripening into a lovely golden sheen. That gives happiness to all of us because we know that we are going to have a bountiful harvest which will make our livelihood secure for another year. We should be able to reap a silver harvest from the sea. If the industry were properly attended to and properly managed, the glistening, glittering fish in the sea would bring the same gladness and happiness into the homes of our fishermen which the golden harvest brings to our farmers and others engaged in the agricultural industry. There seems to be complete unanimity amongst Deputies that the fishing industry could be made a vast and a colossal one if properly worked, one that would bring considerable happiness into the homes of our fishermen.

Mr. Kilroy

I have spoken on this Estimate on each occasion that it came before the House in the last four or five years. I must say that it is in a very deplorable condition. The principal reason for that is the want of proper boats and of proper landing places.

Mr. Dillon

Where?

Mr. Kilroy

In my part of the country. The piers and the slips are in a very bad state. They are in such a bad condition that the fishermen are afraid that if they go out they may not be able to get back. I have three or four landing places in mind that I want to call attention to. There is the one at Portheen at Achill. It is in a very bad condition. That has been so during the past 12 months or two years. The officials of the Board of Works went down there and examined it. I understand they made an estimate for its repair but nothing has been since done. The same can be said of the pier at Darby's Point. They also made an estimate for it. There was the question of a grant from the Government, but nothing has been done because the 25 per cent. that the Mayo County Council was to contribute was not forthcoming. There is a good deal of fish landed at both these places, but the local fishermen are suffering great hardship because nothing has been done to improve the condition of the piers.

The piers at Porturlen and Portacloy are also in a very bad condition. The engineers from the Board of Works also went down there and made a report. I would ask the Minister to see that full grants are given for the repair of these piers. They are very important landing places in that part of the country. There would be a good deal of deep-sea fishing there for mackerel and herring if these piers were improved. Their condition at present handicaps the fishermen considerably.

There is another pier at Graughill. It is in such a condition at the present time that nothing can be landed there. It was blown up by a mine during the first world war and has never been repaired. I understand that the Department was prepared to give a grant for its repair, but since the 25 per cent. contribution that is required from the Mayo County Council was not forthcoming, nothing has been done. The members of the county council hold that a full grant should be given by the Government. As the Mayo County Council is constituted, the majority of the members come from inland places, and hence they are not prepared to agree to the 25 per cent. contribution. I would ask the Minister to see that a full grant is given for the repair of these piers. They are in a very dangerous condition. The fishermen are likely to lose their lives if something is not done to put them in a safe condition. The fishermen there are poorly equipped for fishing. They have only small currachs along that coast and are afraid to go out in bad weather.

I would ask that the Department would give loans for boats to some of the fishermen in that area. I think they are entitled to that much. They should be provided with proper facilities to enable them to carry on the fishing industry. Complaints have been made to me by men in my constituency who used to be engaged in net fishing in the fresh water lakes and rivers which have now been taken over by the rod fishermen. I am of opinion that a law was passed some years ago under which the men who were engaged in the net fishing there would be entitled to compensation. So far, they have not been paid any compensation. I think it is time they got it. These are some of the points that I would ask the Minister to look into.

Mr. P.D. Lehane

I feel that the fishing industry has been very much neglected. I am afraid that we have wasted a considerable amount of energy in developing industries for which we had not the raw material at hand. In fact, we tried to develop some industries that could be described as exotic industries, while at the same time ignoring the wealth and the harvest that, so to speak, lie at our hands around the coasts of the country. I think it is about time the Department tackled this problem seriously. I believe the home market for fish could be considerably developed if there were proper transport facilities. I suggest that the Minister should take that matter up with the Department of Industry and Commerce and see that proper facilities for transporting fish to inland towns are made available. There is a certain antagonism to the eating of fish among people in inland towns, but I believe that if they got their fish delivered fresh regularly the fish eating habit could be developed. In that way we would provide a considerable market for the catches of our fishermen and at the same time we would leave other commodities available that we might export in exchange for something we require at home.

The Minister referred to trawlers and deep-sea fishing. He said he has decided that we are not to have deep-sea-fishing or trawlers. The fact is that we have trawlers but we do not own them. Other countries have these trawlers coming within our three-mile limit and they are carrying on deep sea fishing which the Minister thinks, in his wisdom—probably he is very well advised—is against the interests of the inshore fishermen, and the interests of fishing generally. He has decided, anyhow, that he cannot permit the Irish people to have trawlers, but the French, the Spaniards, the Norwegians and the English are coming within our three-mile limit and taking these fish. If somebody has to take the fish, I suggest it should be Irishmen in Irish trawlers rather than men in foreign trawlers.

I am glad that the Minister will see the Minister for Defence with the object of getting our aeroplanes to have some practice spotting poachers. He should also ask the Minister for Defence to put the motor torpedo boats and corvettes in certain areas where they would be in reasonable distance of the foreign trawlers when they are notified by the aeroplanes that the Minister hopes to have protecting our coasts. That practice would give valuable experience to the members of the naval service and our air force.

There is one place in my constituency that I hope the Minister will make some effort to help, and that is the town of Kinsale, which has for years been famous for its fishing industry. At the moment the natives of Kinsale cannot get a fish because they are taken by foreign trawlers. Kinsale is like a deserted village, a decadent town. The people are emigrating; they are joining the British Navy or are going to the United States. If there was proper protection for the fishing industry and proper transport for the fish there would be considerable employment for the people there. Kinsale is one of the towns that have had their railways taken away by shortsighted people. In the old days it was a garrison town, but it is not like that at the moment.

When the Minister is considering where he will place the quick-freezing plant to which reference was made in this debate, he should give some consideration to such an important centre as Kinsale. It could also serve other parts of West and East Cork. There is also room for a canning factory in Kinsale and it would be desirable to establish a factory there for producing fish foods for stock feeding and possibly a factory for fertilisers. Kinsale is a town that has great possibilities and if the Minister will give these matters some consideration he will find he will be doing something for the benefit of the fishing industry as a whole.

Our fishing industry has undoubtedly been neglected and it can be developed. I believe the home market for fish can readily be developed if some attention is paid to a proper system of transport.

Mr. Little

When I raised certain questions last year in the innocence of my heart I got a certain amount of abuse because I criticised certain matters, and I came to the conclusion that it was the usual legal method—when the lawyer has a bad case he must have recourse to abuse. I am, and always have been, interested in the fishing industry and, perhaps, that is natural enough, seeing that I represent a constituency which has such a large seaboard as County Waterford. Listening to the debate, I was impressed by the general criticism of the policy of the Government with regard to the fishing industry. There seems to be a lack of imagination and enterprise about it.

I have listened to people putting forward ideas as to how the fishing industry should be developed and it often set me wondering how it is we are so lacking in Ireland in the matter of being marine minded. I do not say that it is altogether the fault of this Government or the previous Government or the Department, but we are definitely lacking in what one might call the marine mind. It may be due to British influence. I think it is partly due to that. The British Government have always encouraged fisheries, especially in Scotland and Newfoundland, so that they could draw from those places material for their fleet. But that incentive was not present in the case of Ireland. Again, we were overshadowed by the fishing industry of Britain which has its own difficulties and its own hard fight. Another factor is that we are such a large producer of meat. You may notice that countries that are good for developing fisheries are fairly poor, from the agricultural point of view—countries such as Norway and the Basque country in the south of France and the north of Spain, where the people are tremendously energetic in their fishing enterprise.

Whatever the reasons may be, we are ignoring a great source of wealth in this country. There is a great fishing bank about 200 miles west of Ireland. Continental people have often spoken to me about it. It is the place where fishermen used to go. Stories have been written in French and other languages about how the fishermen visit that part of the ocean and do most of their fishing along that bank. We have never tried to exploit that bank. The problem before the Minister, of course, is one of marketing. I imagine the solution can be found in several directions. First of all, there is room for the development of the home market. Fish sold at the present time in inland country districts is very unappetising. It is generally carried in baskets which are often not clean and are quite definitely unattractive. Again, we do not cook fish in this country as they cook it on the Continent or in Scotland. We do not seem to have mastered the art of dealing with fish. Countrymen are very glad to get good fish. Men from the mountains have often told me that they would give anything to get good fish. I think a great deal of attention must be paid to the humble details of marketing and of teaching our younger people how to cook fish properly.

It has been impressed upon me by enterprising men that there is a tremendous source of untapped revenue in our potential fishing industry. Factories could convert the surplus fish into fish meal for poultry and animal feeding. If we were to use our own materials in that way it might save us many dollars now and in the future. It is an industry which should be closely examined by the Department. Perhaps the Minister will tell us in concluding whether any examination is being made into the possibilities of developing this wealth around our coast.

I am not impressed by the Minister's argument that we may do away with a mode of life. I do not think you would change the farmer-fisherman into a whole-time fisherman. In some areas in my constituency the fishermen are all deep-sea. They know more about the South Seas than they do about the city of Cork. It is these men and their families who will keep up the supply of deep-sea fishermen. In time the sons of the inshore fishermen could be trained also for the deep-sea fleet.

Mr. Dillon

The Deputy will not take it amiss if I put before him now my dilemma. My problem is that if you have an efficient trawling fleet operating it will deliver so much fish to the domestic market that no market will be left to consume the produce of the inshore fisherman's labour and he will be completely squeezed out. That is the problem.

Mr. Little

I admit that problem is there, but I assume that supply and demand would have to grow hand-in-hand. The best way out of the difficulty would be to develop the market simultaneously with the gradual development of the supply. I think it would be a mistake to discourage even small attempts at deep-sea fishing in the beginning. I think they should be allowed to grow and at the same time we should develop the market. That would be a useful experiment and it might develop into a very valuable source of wealth. I admit it should not be gone into too hastily. We should not develop a large deep-sea fleet to such an extent as to spoil our market. We should develop the fleet and the market pari passu.

Mr. Hickey

There is hardly any fear that we shall rush it at all.

Mr. Little

Now, you are talking.

Mr. Dillon

I will do it to-morrow if you can prove to me that it will not destroy the living of 2,000 men.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Little is in possession.

Mr. Little

I am not objecting to the interruptions.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I am.

Mr. Little

There is one matter upon which I am almost afraid to touch because of the outrageous way in which the Minister spoke last year when I mentioned it. I refer to the guarding of our fish. Last year the Minister asked why I did not do something when I was in office. When a Minister is in office he does not make public announcements about these things. Representations are made by word of mouth. Every Deputy who represents a coastal area is always nudging his Ministerial colleagues and saying: "My friends are at me again about the foreign fishermen coming in and would you send a boat around our way some time." Complaints come from all parts of the coast. I am glad the Minister hopes to induce the Department of Defence to send out their aeroplanes. I imagine that will have a salutary effect. But how is the Minister going to deal with the foreign fishermen who come into the local pubs and do a deal there? That presents a problem. Perhaps it is a trivial matter.

There is then the vexing problem of control over the small ports and piers. I could enumerate several of them beginning at Sheep Point on to Passage and Dunmore and down as far as Ardmore and into Youghal. These are all under various authorities. Some are under the authority of the county council. Some of these authorities do not appreciate the necessity for attending to the upkeep and repair of the harbours and so on under their care. I think all these should be taken over by a central authority in close relationship with the fishing industry. I get all kinds of complaints. Sometimes it is complaints about dredging; sometimes it is because of the length of the pier and sometimes it is because of lack of repair. Nobody seems to know to what authority to appeal. In most cases one gets no results at all and things remain as they are.

In one area I have seen quite a good fishing industry develop in recent years and the number of families making their living out of fishing has increased considerably there. I believe that if attention were paid to these matters very satisfactory results would accrue. There is no doubt that the fishing community are amongst the finest of our people. They live hard, healthy lives. They make fine Irishmen. In many cases they live in native-speaking areas. Any assistance given to them would help in the development of a native-speaking Irish people.

Mr. McQuillan

As Deputy Little has remarked, the House seems to be fairly unanimous that the fishing industry needs much more attention than it has received in the past. All Deputies are agreed that this industry could develop into the second major industry in this country. The Minister, however, does not appear to hold that view. I do not propose to delay the House very long. I spoke on this Estimate last year and I think it is a waste of time repeating myself. The Minister's problem, according to himself, is that he is afraid that the livelihood of the inshore fishermen will be destroyed if he takes steps to develop a deep-sea fishing fleet or to get large trawlers to engage in deep-sea fishing. He has mentioned the fact that he has been asked to put in jeopardy the livelihood of 2,000 inshore fishermen.

Let us examine that argument of the Minister for a moment to see if it can be demolished, as I think it can. He is prepared, as far as I can see, to sacrifice the development of a first-class industry for the sake of protecting the livelihood of 2,000 individuals. He has revealed himself as a man of vision in the sphere of agriculture but he has shown himself to be more than conservative in his outlook on fisheries. The man who is prepared to look ahead and to take a chance in the vast field of agriculture is now hesitating over a small matter—it is a small matter to my mind, at any rate—because the livelihood of 2,000 individuals is going to be affected, in his opinion. I do not want to be misunderstood on this matter. I do not think the livelihood of these 2,000 individuals is going to be affected. I believe if we had a deep-sea fishing fleet the majority of those, who, up to the present, have been participating in inshore fishing could be absorbed in the deep-sea fishing fleet. That such is the case is proven by the fact that of the vast number of fishermen and sailors at present employed in the British mercantile service and the British trawling fleets, the majority are Irishmen.

Mr. Dillon

In the British trawling fleets?

Mr. McQuillan

A vast number of them are Irishmen, from Cork, Connemara, Donegal and other maritime counties. The Minister does not seem to agree with that but I challenge him to dispute it. Deputy Sir John Esmonde and other Deputies have spoken of the by-products of the fishing industry. I do not want to delay the House by elaborating that point, but the Minister himself must realise that apart from supplying fresh fish to the market, deep-sea trawlers would provide the raw materials for further ancillary industries such as the canning and processing of fish. I think I mentioned to the Minister last year that he should consider establishing factories along our coast, and he as much as suggested that I asked him to set up tin-pot factories all over Connemara, Waterford and Donegal. I did no such thing. If the deep-sea fishing fleet produce bigger catches than the Minister or I can envisage, could the surplus not be directed into these canning factories? Why put it on the market or why say that the market is going to be flooded by the quantity of fish that would be caught by the deep-sea fishing trawlers?

At the present time we have a big drive on in agriculture and we all welcome the improved situation in regard to the bacon industry. Every Deputy knows that one of the by-products of the fishing industry, fish meal, is an ideal mixture for feeding pigs. How do we get our fish meal at the moment? We allow foreign trawlers to fish off our coast. They send their catches back to their own countries and we, in turn, buy the fish meal from them, the raw material of which is caught off our own shores. I think that is a nonsensical type of arrangement. I was very critical here before of our navy. I am still critical of it, and I do not believe that we should even discuss such a thing as having a navy.

An Ceann Comhairle

Not on this Vote.

Mr. McQuillan

Our chief objective should be to have a fishing fleet. We have people here talking about protecting our fishing grounds by getting aeroplanes and motor torpedo boats to chase around after foreign trawlers but the real protection, in my opinion, is to send out our own deep-sea trawlers to fish in competition with these foreign gentlemen, to fish on grounds which these gentlemen find so very lucrative. That is the way to protect our fishing industry—to provide competition against these foreign trawlers. Other speakers have mentioned the huge labour content of a deep-sea fishing industry. As I have said, we have only one major basic industry, namely, agriculture. We should try to establish a second one and not depend on foreign countries for these raw materials. We have the fish right at our doors and I think the majority of Deputies would be willing to press very strongly on the Minister to reconsider his attitude towards the question of establishing a deep-sea fishing industry. I was not listening to the Minister's opening remarks but I believe that he is going to reorganise inshore fishermen. That, of course, will be doing the thing in a small way and it will wipe out, in my opinion, any hope of having a deep-sea fishing fleet.

The question of the supply of fish for rural areas enters into this matter in no small way. At the present time, there is a fairly good demand for fish in rural areas but the unfortunate feature about it is that while people may get fish on one Friday, they may not be able to get it for another three weeks afterwards. The supply is so uncertain that some people will not bother looking for fish. In addition, some shops do not like stocking fish as they say it contaminates other commodities and has an objectionable smell. But all that can be got over. If the fish are put on the market regularly the market is there, in other words, transport and the marketing of the fish are vital problems. No sooner have the catches been landed on the shore than there must be a fleet of small trucks like whippet cars at hand to transport it to depot centres all over the country. Fish should be there the same as the daily paper in every corner of the country within 12 hours if the transport system were functioning properly. That is something for the Minister to look into.

To go back to another aspect for a moment, the inland fishing which Deputy Bartley or someone mentioned, I should like the Minister to consider the possibility of nationalising our inland fishing. To my mind, it is a deplorable state of affairs that a few gentlemen, "brass hats" from far-off regions, can come into this country and get control of fishing rights in various rivers. I have one gentleman in mind at the moment who has fishing grounds, fishing rights, which are the most lucrative in the country. They are all in the possession of one individual. People may say that that savours of Communism, but I do not see why it should for a moment.

Mr. Dillon

Will the Deputy excuse me? Is that fishing on the banks of a river or in the mouth of a river?

Mr. McQuillan

Both in the mouth of the river and on the banks for considerable distances. The fact is that that is a natural source of wealth and should be at the disposal of a majority of the people. It should not be the right of any individual to have a mineral or a source of wealth which God gave for the use of everybody. It is not right that one man can hold the public up to ransom because he is lucky or powerful enough to secure control of certain fishing rights. The Minister should look into that. Let the rights be State-owned and not the property of any individual or individuals.

I can only confess to a very deep disappointment at the present Minister's attitude towards the fishing industry. I would always pay a compliment to a man who works hard as the present Minister is working. He has shown in his other sphere of agriculture that he has vision and is prepared to go full steam ahead in spite of strong and at times unwarranted criticism, but his attitude towards the fishing industry is, to my mind, very conservative. That is a sad commentary to have to make on the Minister but the truth must be faced.

Mr. P.J. Burke

Like other speakers, I agree that we should now try to make fishing one of our chief national industries. This is done in other countries, Norway, Denmark and Sweden, some of which have a population similar to our own and some of which have a population less than our own. Take Denmark: in 1947 the fishing industry was worth £5,000,000. In Norway there is a population of 3,600,000 and it gives employment to over 112,000 people. I feel that we have a wealth in the seas around our shores. It was nice to hear Deputies of all sides of the House agreeing that we have reached the time when we should give more encouragement to our fishing industry. I feel also that by dealing with the fishing industry piecemeal we are never going to get ahead. I thoroughly agree with the Minister in support of the inshore fishermen; their fathers carried on that work before them and they have always lived in a little community and tried to carry on in that way.

The problem with which we must deal first is to try to improve our harbours even if we have to protect the inshore fishermen to some extent. We have reached the point even in County Dublin where the harbours are not adequate for the boats which have to go into them. While I have been critical towards the Minister on other occasions, I must say on this occasion that he is making an attempt to do something about Loughshinny harbour as a result of representations I have made to him. I am not as uncharitable as you might think.

Mr. Dillon

Someone might come to my aid.

Mr. P.J. Burke

But I would like the Minister to continue to do something in regard to that harbour. The Chairman of Sea Fisheries and an engineer from the Board of Works were down there with me and the one thing they were afraid of is that the Minister will not come forward and give the required grant to make it a decent job.

Mr. Dillon

Did they tell you that, Deputy?

Mr. P.J. Burke

I am not compromising any civil servants; I am dealing straight with the Minister and his Department. There is no use in dealing with Loughshinny as one harbour and giving a small grant. A number of boats have been smashed there during the last few winters. There would be about ten boats altogether in that small harbour, two of 50 feet and others of 38 feet, 30 feet and 40 feet. The Minister and his Department should show that they are really in earnest and make one decent harbour in that area. The fishermen in north County Dublin feel that the time has arrived when small boats are of very little use because a boat of less than 50 feet cannot go to sea unless the day is reasonably calm. If the public at large want a supply of fish these men must be supplied with boats that can go to sea in reasonably bad weather. Furthermore, an important point is that they want a harbour they can run into when bad weather comes. Sea Fisheries as an institution have been doing their best but they could not get boats or gear during the past few years. There is no use in putting the blame on Sea Fisheries or the officials unless the Minister responsible and his Department will supply the necessary money to carry out this very necessary work. Rush harbour, if I might say so, is also on dry land. The Minister had promised to get that harbour cleaned. That promise is 18 months old now and nothing has been done and I hope it will not continue for another 18 months. The fishing industry is decaying in that district as a result of the very bad harbour and the boats have to go to other harbours. The result is that the small number of families there who are concerned with the fishing industry are losing heart.

Mr. Davin

What do you mean by "a dry land harbour"?

Mr. Dillon

It is where the widow lives.

Mr. P.J. Burke

By "a dry land harbour" I mean a harbour that has silted up with sand to the extent that you would think it was a dry land harbour. That harbour has silted up nine or ten feet so that the boats can only come in on a high tide and then only to the mouth of the harbour. That is another harbour for which the Minister should come up to his promises.

Mr. Dillon

To enable her ladyship to go to sea.

Mr. P.J. Burke

We have another problem in the Balbriggan harbour. The fishermen over a number of years have constantly agitated about the silting of sand in the harbour and the Parliamentary Secretary, now sitting beside the Minister, dealing with that problem made some promises also to send a dredger to Balbriggan. He did send a dredger, but she did not stay long enough to do a good job.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance (Mr. Donnellan)

Why?

Mr. P.J. Burke

She was wanted somewhere else in a hurry and she ran into Balbriggan and out again. These are problems the fishing industry is up against in the local harbours, in Howth, Loughshinny, Balbriggan and Rush. Give the people a decent harbour if you want to put the inshore fishermen in a way in which they can earn a decent livelihood and develop the industry. Save the inshore fisherman and his family. Give them a boat, 50 feet or larger, in that particular area and you will be doing something worth while for the industry in the constituency with which I am deeply concerned.

Until this or any other Government makes an honest effort to do something worth while for the fishing industry, instead of heaping all the abuse and vilification on the Sea Fisheries Association, and until it becomes Government policy to give, not £80,000 more for gear and boats but a few million pounds, we will not be developing properly the industry we have at our doors ready for development. It has been dealt with properly in other countries and I do not see why that cannot be done here.

We have also the problem of the three-mile limit. My colleague, Deputy Dr. Ryan, referred to the time when he was in charge of the Department and made representations to the then British Government to agree to get the three-mile limit extended. The present Minister should continue those representations, to make it at least six miles. Old fishermen along the coast have told me that the fishing industry has been robbed by deep-sea trawlers coming in during the night. That is a national problem. I ask the Minister to try to get the limit extended.

Mr. Dillon

Unless we have a peace conference, I do not see how I can do it.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I am cognisant of all the difficulties.

Mr. Lemass

Others have done it, without a peace conference.

Mr. Dillon

I do not see how it can be done without an international conference.

Mr. Lemass

We want to know from the Minister the result of the discussions that were proceeding with the British Government at the time of the change of Government here.

Mr. Dillon

That is not what Deputy Burke asked. Deputy Lemass is trying to dig him out—and making a pretty good hand of it.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I want to know if he will make representations to have the three-mile limit extended.

Mr. Dillon

To whom should I make representations for the extension of the three-mile limit?

Mr. P.J. Burke

There is general international agreement, I understand.

Mr. Dillon

You would have to call a peace conference analogous to that which settled the Treaty of Versailles.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I am not going into that. We can discuss it on another Vote. I welcome also the quick-freezing plants and would like to find out from the Minister where they will be installed. I have felt for a number of years that the association should get more power, and more money should be put at their disposal to run fish from the harbours to the centre of Ireland. The Minister may tell me he does not want to compete with private enterprise.

Mr. Dillon

I told the Deputy no such thing.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I say that possibly the Minister would tell me that. If we are to handle this industry properly, it must be on national lines. What has happened the industry is that the fish usually arrive in inland towns about three days old. The people may buy on one occasion, but on the next five occasions they will say they cannot go near such fish owing to its bad condition. The association and the Department should consider the possibility of making fresh fish available in the large inland towns. That will have to come, of course, after the harbours and ports are developed and gear is provided.

I was not here when the Minister referred to the canning industry. Canning industries have been a great success in other countries and should be a success here. Why should we import fish from other countries, instead of curing our own? The Minister has an opportunity now, if he has any regard for the industry, if he acts properly instead of carrying on, promising to do something and taking such a long time to do it.

Mr. Rooney

What happened before the war?

Mr. P.J. Burke

Deputy Rooney will get an opportunity to speak in due course. He should be very careful about making interruptions here, because the last interruption here caused a debate down in Rush. There is a surplus of fish at certain periods of the year and we are told the fishermen have a lot left on their hands. I do not see why the association and the Minister should not encourage the canning industry more.

Mr. Dillon

The Deputy is aware that we are canning fish? May I have the pleasure of sending him a can?

Mr. Lemass

Who are "we"?

Mr. Dillon

Irish industry.

Mr. P.J. Burke

It must be in a very small way and without the national outlook a national industry should have. That is only dealing with it in a piecemeal way. Unless the Minister is going to do it properly, he should leave it alone. He should not be starting on the old game of adding a yard to the pier and a yard to the boat and then saying that the inshore fishermen are doing well.

Mr. M.J. O'Higgins

Was that not the way for the last 16 years?

Mr. P.J. Burke

I will deal with Deputy M. O'Higgins' interruption in a few minutes. Another industry which has been discussed here on several occasions is the fishmeal industry. It is an industry which should be developed. In other countries, there are fishmeal factories where surplus fish are disposed of and, in Norway, even the bones do not go astray. Unless we look on the fishing industry, not from a Party point of view, but from an entirely national point of view, we will not get anywhere with it.

I should like to see more liberal grants available to inshore fishermen for the purchase of boats and gear. While the Sea Fisheries Association has been doing its best for them, the officials are tied up in rules and regulations since the association was established. We are dealing here with a section of our people who are very poor, although there may be a few amongst them who have got on. They are people who undergo great hardships, and, when we speak of them here, we deal with them in a general way. I feel that these fishermen should be better looked after. I have been on some of the boats and have seen the conditions in which these men have to sleep, when staying out possibly for weeks. The only way to deal with this problem is to give them a harbour and then give them a decent boat, and give up all this eyewash about giving them something worth while when you give them a net and a small boat. I should also like to see more up-to-date marine apparatus in their boats.

Mr. Dillon

Would the Deputy be good enough to tell me what is marine apparatus?

Mr. P.J. Burke

I am sure the Minister is not so dull of apprehension that he need ask that very nonsensical question.

Mr. Dillon

I am damned if I know what marine apparatus is.

Mr. P.J. Burke

Ask Deputy Collins, who knows everything.

Mr. Dillon

Is it rowlocks the Deputy is referring to—or a pair of oars?

Mr. P.J. Burke

Ask Deputy Collins behind you. There is nothing he does not know.

Mr. Dillon

He does not know what marine apparatus is.

Mr. Lemass

Ask Deputy Collins.

Mr. S. Collins

I do not know, I confess.

Mr. P.J. Burke

Ordinary modern conveniences that every up-to-date boat carries—even wireless.

An Ceann Comhairle

There have been several speakers on this Vote and no interruptions until now. Some Deputies seem to think this is a place of amusement.

Mr. Dillon

I hope I have not offended.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister did interrupt.

Mr. Dillon

I respectfully asked the Deputy, whom it is my duty to answer, what is marine apparatus, because I want to be able to tell him whether it is in the boats or not.

Mr. Lemass

I am keeping a count of the number of the Minister's interruptions.

An Ceann Comhairle

And I have also done so.

Mr. Dillon

It seems to me a very reasonable thing to ask, when it is my duty to answer.

An Ceann Comhairle

If the Minister cannot answer, I cannot help it, but he has the right to sum up.

Mr. Davin

The Deputy said wireless.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I am sorry the Minister is getting so ruffled, though he would not mind ruffling others himself. I wonder if he ever saw a fishing boat at all.

Mr. S. Collins

A dry land harbour.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Collins was not interrupted once and he should give as good a hearing as he got.

Mr. P.J. Burke

Does the Minister realise what these men have to put up with when they go to sea? Does he realise the conditions in the old tubs in which they go out, without any modern conveniences to enable them to send messages, if they are in difficulties? He knows well enough what I have been trying to talk about. He is the Minister who, on other occasions, tried to misrepresent me and we know how flamboyant he can become on these matters. He is the Minister who, on last Friday, spoke of a decent group of people, the Beet Growers' Association——

An Ceann Comhairle

That association has nothing whatever to do with this Vote.

Mr. P.J. Burke

Members of the association contradicted him here in the House, and——

An Ceann Comhairle

That has nothing whatever to do with this Vote.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I am dealing with the Minister's conduct.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy will deal with the Vote.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I hope the Minister will now be manly enough to withdraw his scurrilous remarks of last Friday about these people.

An Ceann Comhairle

If the Deputy again attempts to overrule the Chair, he will sit down.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I am sorry, Sir.

An Ceann Comhairle

I think the Deputy understands quite well.

Mr. P.J. Burke

There is another problem in marketing fish from the fishing ports of North County Dublin. The fishermen in Loughshinny purchased a lorry to carry fish to the market. The lorry was driven by a man who was a mechanic and who looked after their boats. It was a co-operative venture. It happened on a few occasions that the Loughshinny fishing boats had to go to Skerries and, as a result, the lorry driver contravened a section of the Transport Act. He was summoned. I know that the Minister has not very much control over this matter. Neither has the Minister for Industry and Commerce. The Act is there. The fact remains that there is grave hardship involved for these people, having purchased the lorry and having employed this man. They were anxious to keep him but they are finding great difficulty in keeping him in constant employment. He does not care to go to sea.

Deputy Bartley made a point about the employees in the Sea Fisheries Association. I have great satisfaction in supporting Deputy Bartley in his plea that these employees should be considered for a pension scheme. If the State or semi-State organisations cannot give good example——

Mr. Dillon

As far as I am aware, I have no power to initiate a pension scheme for the Sea Fisheries Association employees.

An Ceann Comhairle

Then it is not in order.

Mr. Dillon

I suppose that is nothing new to you, Sir?

An Ceann Comhairle

I have had experience of Deputies rambling.

Mr. Lemass

And Ministers.

Mr. Dillon

Yes.

Mr. Donnellan

And ex-Ministers.

Mr. Dillon

I am not complaining.

Mr. P.J. Burke

Is it not in order to refer to the employees of a concern, and to their conditions of employment?

An Ceann Comhairle

There is no use asking the Minister to initiate a pension scheme if he has nothing to do with it.

Mr. Lemass

He is giving them a substantial amount of money in this Estimate.

Mr. P.J. Burke

When the Minister gets an opportunity of dealing with the employees of that association, he should make the necessary recommendations that they should be looked after. It is very little use for the Government of a country to ask employers——

Mr. Dillon

I take it that the question as to whether it is in order or not is one you are prepared to overlook for the moment?

An Ceann Comhairle

I have not the remotest idea of what the Deputy is driving at.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I am talking about the employees.

An Ceann Comhairle

A pension scheme?

Mr. Lemass

Employees of an organisation that this Estimate is voting money to. I submit that is in order.

An Ceann Comhairle

Very good. I will see what the Deputy has to say about it.

Mr. Davin

The Deputy could recommend it, anyway.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I recommend that these employees be made permanent employees.

Mr. Dillon

Seeing that Deputy Lemass has chosen to take a doss in this matter——

Mr. P.J. Burke

I am not giving way at all, Minister. Sit down. You can answer later. I was called by the Ceann Comhairle. The Minister did not raise a point of order.

Mr. Dillon

On a point of order. So far as I am aware, Sir, I have no responsibility or power to initiate any proposal in regard to a pension scheme for the employees of the Sea Fisheries Association. Having put that on record, I make no objection to Deputy Burke talking about them for an hour but, so far as I know, I have no power to initiate such a proposal.

Mr. Lemass

In reply to that, I would submit that when the Dáil is being asked to vote money for the purpose of any association, it is open to a Deputy to argue that the Vote should be made subject to conditions affecting the terms of employment of those in its service.

Mr. Davin

A fair wages clause, yes.

Mr. Dillon

Provided it does not involve legislation, which may not be advocated on the occasion of discussing a Minister's Estimate.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair thinks that a pension scheme contributed to by the State would require legislation.

Mr. Lemass

I have not heard Deputy Burke urge a contribution by the State.

Mr. S. Collins

He does not know what he is talking about himself.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I do not see why I cannot make a suggestion regarding employees. We have spoken from the national point of view as far as the fishing industry is concerned.

Mr. S. Collins

"I". Never mind the "we".

Mr. P.J. Burke

I have spoken about the fishermen and the conditions under which they have to work. I have indicated the hardships they labour under. I have made suggestions for the alleviation of those hardships: the provision of better harbours, better gear and better markets. I am also concerned with the employees who are administering the affairs of the Sea Fisheries Association and, if that is out of order, I must have been out of order since I got to my feet. The Minister has tried to put me off some points by interrupting me repeatedly but, of course, that is nothing new in this House. The Minister in charge of this Vote is very good at doing these things. I cannot see why the Minister would not recommend to the responsible authorities that these employees should be made permanent, if he is not in a position to make them permanent himself. I know that he has lost some very good employees in the Department of Fisheries because of the temporary nature of their work. There was no permanency about it.

I wonder could something be done for dependents of fishermen who lose their lives? Could the Minister, the Department of Fisheries and the Sea Fisheries Association consider introducing some scheme of insurance that would be initiated by the Government for the dependents of fishermen who lose their lives? There have been many tragedies around our coast from time to time. There have been periodic appeals for assistance for the wives and families of drowned fishermen and, possibly, for funds to bury the fisherman and perhaps two or three sons who were drowned with him. The State should see to matters of that kind and ensure that the dependents of these hard-working fishermen will not be left in want for the remainder of their days. These are matters of public and social importance and should be favourably considered by the Department concerned.

I want now to refer to the inadequate lighting of harbours. The county council are concerned. The Electricity Supply Board will do a certain amount. The Minister should look after all these things. I do not see why any public representative should have to come in here and make these appeals. If the industry is to be put on its feet, the needs of these people must be looked after. Some fishermen have to travel a long distance to their boats and may have to be at the harbour on a winter's morning at 2 or 3 o'clock, waiting for the tide. A house or clubroom or some such shelter should be built for them near the pier. These men should be catered for as employees in other branches of industry are catered for. In other industries, clubrooms and canteens are provided but the unfortunate fisherman is treated as nobody's child. These are modern demands that one would expect any responsible Department would definitely look after. In some of the fishing ports I have been in you have to go out with a storm lamp. If you slip you have to crawl on your hands and knees until you reach the boat. If I were speaking to a considerate Minister and to a Minister who had the welfare of the plain people of Ireland at heart, I would have more pleasure in trying to put over this point. However, I am dealing with such a flamboyant Minister who does not mind whether I sit down or talk, and takes no notice whatsoever. I might as well not be talking to anybody.

The Minister did not think the various points I raised on other Votes worth referring to. I know the way he has answered me in the past. I know the way he will answer me tonight or to-morrow. He will go back to his old game—personal slander. That is his answer. I have raised these points conscientiously in the interests of the people whom I have the honour to represent and the people of the fishing industry as a whole. I do not want my remarks to be treated in any flamboyant way by any Minister of State. This is a serious matter to me and to the country as a whole. We are sent here by the people of the country to do our best to improve their lot. For my part, no flamboyant Minister or anybody else will ever deter me from putting before this House the views which I conscientiously hold.

Mr. J. Flynn

One of the best speeches made in this debate was made by Deputy S. Collins. I am in full agreement with his statement that a deep-sea fishing fleet should be established and so arranged as to be an asset to this country and, indirectly, to assist the inshore fishing industry. In fact, I would go further and say that the Sea Fisheries Association as we know it ought to be remodelled and that we should have a separate Ministry of Fisheries. The matter, in my opinion, is so important that the Department of Fisheries should be a separate Department with a separate Minister and, instead of having an allocation of, say, £100,000 or £500,000, it should be capable of being developed and of calling for an Estimate of £1,000,000 for a year. The only fault I have to find with the Minister's statement is that he said that a deep-sea fishing fleet was not and could not be practical. Not alone did he say that it was not practical at the moment but he said that he did not believe it would be practical in the future. I entirely disagree with the Minister on that point. Whilst I appreciate his efforts in other directions I certainly am not in agreement with him in that connection. We have, on several occasions, put forward to his Department and to the Sea Fisheries Association certain schemes for developments in our district in South Kerry. I am glad to hear the Minister say that he will give us certain consideration in regard to building yards, facilities for acquiring gear, nets and so forth.

However, I should like to make the point that we have men down there who are perfectly capable of boat-building and other practical work of that kind. They resent the idea of being sent to Killybegs or to any other district for their requirements or of bringing men in from other districts when we have our own men on the spot who are capable of doing that work. I was down there and they informed me, when it was a question of installing engines, that our men should take their boats across to Dingle or have them supervised by some engineer from Killybegs. We have men down there who are well qualified and I will give their names to the Minister and to his Department. These men are trained and they are very capable. In addition, they have had very long experience in the boat-building business, in the installation of engines and so forth. I want to stress that point.

On another occasion I have referred to a quick-freezing plant. There is no such thing as a marketing system and there never was in the strict sense of the word. If we had this type of plant it would enable our people to obtain the maximum price on the spot. The catch could then be preserved, held over for an evening and then transported to the different towns throughout the country. In that way a profitable organisation could be built up and we could have a proper system. I know that the Sea Fisheries Association are doing their utmost in present circumstances but there is not sufficient interest. For instance, the Sea Fisheries Association last year were allocated by the Government only about one-fifth of the amount required for the purchase of gear, boats and work in connection with the organisation. Nobody can blame an organisation when its recommendations are not carried out and when the money is not provided to enable the suggestions put forward by them to be put into force. I am aware of all that. I am not against the Department but I am against the whole system. For years this has not been dealt with as an important Department of State and as an important industry.

I was listening to Deputy Dr. Ryan. He referred to the 1939 Act. To my amazement, he asked why it was not implemented. What was he doing when he was here for nine or ten years? This is 1949 and that Act went through in 1939. Provision was made at that time for the acquisition by the State of several fisheries, to be run in the general interest, but no action whatever was taken. I admit, of course, that the war period intervened. Nevertheless, something should have been done and could have been done, and now Deputy Dr. Ryan comes along and asks, as if he were a disinterested party for the last ten years, why something was not done.

We have one of the most valuable fisheries in the State in County Kerry which is run by a company who are making a huge profit. We have dozens of fishermen employed there and we have dozens of fishermen unemployed in the district. If the State acquired this fishery, instead of having one or two people running the whole concern and making £50,000 or £100,000 a year profit, it could be so arranged that the fishery would maintain 100 families instead of the ten, 20 or 30 employed at the moment. That is the type of work I want to see carried out under the Bill referred to by Deputy Dr. Ryan. That Bill was not implemented and the time is ripe when it should be. I have listened to Deputy McQuillan and others who made the same request as I am making. I realise that these men will have to be compensated. Nevertheless, it will be a good day's work for the country and for the fishing industry. Why should not the State take this fishery over in the same way as the Department of Agriculture acquires proprietary creameries and runs them in the general interest and for the benefit of the farmers? There was no sense at all in putting a measure through here in 1939 and leaving it over since then and doing nothing about it. I entirely agree with Deputy Commons that the fishing industry could be made a good second to the agricultural industry if sufficient money was made available for the carrying through of different schemes of development.

Deputy Dr. Ryan also referred to the Cromane mussel plant. The Sea Fisheries Association allocate very little money for operations down there. They are restricted and have not sufficient money to enable them to carry on important operations there. I have made representations to the Minister in the matter. I am not like other people—I like to give full credit where it is due. In my opinion, the Minister is making a good job of his Department and has gone out of his way to make a study of all these problems and to alleviate the hardships of the people I represent. This Cromane mussel plant was an experiment. I give full credit to the former Minister for Agriculture who assisted us in establishing that plant which has justified itself. We have proved that, in certain conditions, not alone can we have an export trade but we can compete favourably with Holland and other countries on the British market. We are hoping that this plant will be extended. It is not sufficiently large at present to deal with all the people who want to get their mussels put through that purification tank. I am making the case that further development work should be carried out there.

As to boats and gear, Deputy Bartley complained that Galway did not get what it was entitled to in accordance with the number of fishermen registered with the association in regard to the allocation of boats and gear. I claim that Kerry is as important and perhaps more important than some of the counties mentioned. It certainly is as extensive and important as Galway and we have not obtained the quota to which we are entitled. Were it not for the Minister's action in assisting me to get Kelvin engines for a few people down there, we would have been left out completely. So far as boats are concerned, our fishermen have been applying for them since 1939, but, with the exception of one or two, they have been left out completely. Deputy Bartley may have good grounds for his complaint, but he is not alone in this matter. I claim that we are entitled to our fair share in proportion to the number of our fishermen and the number registered with the association.

I hope the suggestions I have made will be borne in mind. I am making them in a helpful way. I am not offering destructive criticism, but helpful criticism. I am anxious that the conditions of our people on the southwestern seaboard should be realised. If the Minister for Agriculture was in Valentia Island as I was some time ago on a Sunday evening, he would have seen three Spanish trawlers hauled in there. It would make your blood boil to see them. You would certainly think that we were 100 years behind the times and ask yourself: "Where are our own fishermen who could handle that industry if they had these trawlers and fishing fleets?" These invaders, as I would be inclined to call them, were right in at the pier. That is the thing which should be uppermost in your mind. That is why I resent the Minister's statement when he said that he did not see now or in the future the possibility of having a deep-sea fishing fleet. In my opinion you either have machine-guns and clear these people out of the three-mile limit or go out and put your own fleet side by side with them. That is the only way out of it. In conclusion I appreciate everything the Minister and his Department have done and I hope that any suggestions I have made have been helpful.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

There are only a few observations that I should like to make in connection with this Estimate. In doing so I should like to depart from the matters which have been discussed rather extensively, the relative merits of different policies in relation to the sea-fishing industry. I should like to say a word or two in connection with the inland fisheries of this country. Again, much that has been said regarding the potential value of our sea-fishing industry applies, of course, with equal force to the inland fisheries of Ireland. Apart from other matters they are an important source of wealth to the people connected with the tourist industry and to the country generally. That being so there is no necessity to expand that at all. That is a fact which is universally recognised. Realising that fact, I think anyone who regards the inland fisheries of this country to-day must have considerable misgivings about the care and attention which is being paid to them and about their future. Many people who have studied, even casually, our inland fisheries are of the opinion now that unless some immediate attention is given to their care and protection, in a very short space of years we will have no inland fisheries at all. Inland fisheries in this country ordinarily cover the important salmon fisheries of the country, but they also cover the more mundane trout fishing which used to represent a very important attraction in this country, not only to holiday-makers from other countries but also to Irishmen to spend their holidays in this country.

There are at present certain clearly distinguished deficiencies in the manner in which our brown trout and, indeed, the salmon in our fisheries are controlled. To my mind there are two causes of the present condition of our inland fisheries. These two causes could be grouped into (1) social or artificial causes and (2) natural causes. As far as social or artificial causes are concerned, there is the great problem of poaching. It is not necessary for any Deputy to discuss the harm which poaching does to fisheries generally. Suffice to say that poaching carried on as it is, pretty widespread in certain areas, destroys not merely the existing wealth of fish but also the potentiality for future increases in inland fisheries. I suggest to the Minister that some proper scheme of education should be carried out by his Department in relation to poaching. I know myself and I think many Deputies, particularly country Deputies, will recognise the truth of what I say. Most of us do not regard poaching as very serious. Most of us, indeed, find it hard in any way to regard the poacher as an offender or in any way as a person to be blamed, the reason being that up to 27 years ago fishing in the inland fisheries of this country was the strictly guarded preserve of the old ascendency class. The ordinary Irishman, the ordinary person in this country, when he heard of the poacher always said: "Good luck to him and may he get his catch."

When I discuss poaching I do not mean the fellow who goes into some strictly preserved fishery in the proper season by fair means and takes a catch of fish. If he gets away with it, good luck to him. But I do condemn the young fellow in the villages and towns who, in the spawning season, goes out to the little stream that flows under or near a road and nets the unfortunate trout or salmon when they are spawning. That man is doing considerable damage to an important national asset. I say to the Minister that poaching cannot be prevented by the Gardaí in the country or by water bailiffs where such exist. It can only be prevented by a proper public opinion which will condemn it. In each village and town, particularly in the tourist areas of the country, the local publican, the local hotelkeeper, the baker or butcher, a local person of some note in that particular village or town, should be entrusted by the Department, or whatever other authority may interest itself in this particular matter, with the duty of keeping an eye on poaching, particularly at times when damage can be done. That is one matter which I think is a cause of the present sadly depleted fish of our inland fisheries.

Another cause is the question of pollution. I only say that the provisions of the Fishery Act, 1939, in relation to causes of pollution in our rivers should be more strictly enforced by the Gardaí or by responsible authorities in each fishing area. Pollution will completely destroy a river, not merely temporarily but for many years. Pollution, particularly pollution from creameries, is even still doing considerable damage in the inland fisheries. One other matter which also causes considerable damage to fisheries —and I am glad to see the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance in the House—is arterial drainage. I do not want to discuss that in any detail. I know that the authorities responsible for arterial drainage are aware of the possible damage which arterial drainage does. However, it is a matter with which the Minister must concern himself. It stands to reason that if you deepen a river by means of arterial drainage the excessive flow of water at certain periods of the year and the reduced flow of water at other periods of the year bring about that unstable condition which frightens any existing stock away from the river. There is one thing that could be done in connection with arterial drainage, and that is that, instead of cutting the rivers in a straight course which appears to be the practice at present, as far as possible a certain amount of zigzagging should be done. That is one way in which the harm that arterial drainage does to fisheries could be reduced. Another thing is, of course, that weed cutting could be modified greatly.

Apart from these matters which I have mentioned, which continue to cause damage to fisheries, there are other causes which I may describe as natural causes which must get the attention of the Department and should have the attention of it from year to year. Some 18 months or two years ago in an inland fishery near this city a disease known as tapeworm broke out amongst a stock of trout. It spread throughout the entire stock of trout in an artificial lake not far from the city. It spread from fish to fish, and eventually destroyed the entire stock. That disease was caused by the presence of cormorants in the lake. Since the outbreak of that disease two years ago, the particular signs of it have been found in other places, particularly in the West. I should like to impress on the Minister that, if the inland fisheries are to be safeguarded, some section or officials in the Department should be very much on their toes to safeguard against a further outbreak of this disease. If through inattention or through complacency it is allowed to spread from lake to lake it will be found very quickly that there is no way of getting rid of it until the entire stock of fish in a particular lake or river is completely destroyed.

I want to impress on the House and on the Minister that the one matter which does require immediate attention is this question of disease in trout and salmon. I might mention in that connection that at present a number of our lakes in Connemara and the West are affected by a particular parasite known, I think, as carp louse or argulus to give it its technical name. This particular parasite is in some of the principal western lakes at present and is likely to spread to other lakes throughout the country. Its presence in a lake means that the entire stock of fish is being slowly destroyed and that once it gets into a lake the stock cannot be saved. The existence of such diseases, or their possibility, are matters which should have the immediate concern of the Minister and the Department. Might I also mention, that another cause of the present condition of the inland fisheries is the lack of attention to predatory birds. I mentioned cormorants. They are one of the most serious enemies to our inland fisheries. Not very long ago 72 of them were counted on the river Liffey. It is estimated that a cormorant eats from ten to 15 lbs. of fish in the day. It is not difficult to calculate that those 72 cormorants on the river Liffey ate some 5,000 or 6,000 lbs. of fish in a week. These figures enable one to appreciate the considerable damage and the depredations that are done by those birds to our inland fisheries. I suggest to the Minister that the rewards for the shooting of cormorants should be increased and that every effort should be made to destroy them.

I was interested to hear what the Minister said about coarse fish and the tests that the Department proposes to carry out on four experimental lakes. I sympathise with the Minister in the difficulty that he finds himself in between two sets of advisers, each suggesting quite contrary theories as facts to him. I do not know sufficient about the subject to say whether it is necessary that all coarse fish should be destroyed, but it is interesting to consider this, that one of the main predatory fish that we have—the pike—is an imported fish and has been quite a recent arrival in this country. I do not think there can be any doubt that pike do a considerable amount of harm. I commend the Minister for his foresight in carrying out these experiments and I trust that the results will enable him to arrive at a very clear protective policy.

Now, having said so much about our inland fisheries, may I say one other thing without in any way advocating legislation in this matter? I do suggest to the Minister that this whole question of the preservation of our inland fisheries, the proper policy to adopt and the proper steps to take, is a matter which has been argued about and talked about for a great number of years, and that we are still at the arguing stage and still at the urging stage. I suggest to the Minister that he should apply his mind to the desirability of establishing some central body, statutory or otherwise, which will be charged with the duty of safeguarding the country's inland fisheries. This is not a matter that often gets publicity, and it is not a matter that ordinarily arouses either interest or much discussion publicly. I do impress on the Minister that, unless immediate steps are taken for the preservation of our inland fisheries we shall have nothing to preserve in a short number of years. In saying that, I do not mean this year or next year, but I do say that the inland fisheries—quality and potential—are unfortunately on a very steep decline at present. Their condition is such that they require the immediate attention of the Department. I suggest that not only by the ways I have mentioned, but also by the establishment of some central body charged with the care and protection of inland fisheries, a beginning can be made.

I would also like to suggest to the Minister that some consideration should be given to the question of angling facilities for the ordinary people and for tourists who come here. Deputy Bartley, Deputy McQuillan or some other Deputy mentioned already that a considerable number of very attractive fisheries are at the moment strictly preserved. Of course, that is a fact. If you cross the Shannon there is scarcely a place where you can throw a line without having to pay a fee to the owner or to some person who claims to have a right to that particular fishery. Apart from that, there are lakes and rivers in respect of which the fishing rights are vested either in the Electricity Supply Board or the Land Commission, or other bodies of that type.

There are, on the other hand, rivers and lakes which are completely unrated. If it does occur to the Minister that such a body as I have suggested should be established to safeguard the inland fisheries, that body should, as a first step, be given the charge and care of waters in respect of which the Land Commission have the fishing rights or in respect of which the Electricity Supply Board have similar rights, and also all unrated waters. As regards these particular rights, a policy such as I have suggested, or some policy with a similar aim and purpose, should be carried out. In that way we will be making a good beginning towards preserving a very important national asset.

Mr. Ormonde

In the course of my remarks I shall deal almost entirely with the claims for fishing rights of a number of my constituents who live on the banks of the Blackwater. There is a peculiar situation prevailing there, in that you have a number of tenants on the right bank of the Blackwater who purchased under the Ashbourne Act and who enjoy the fishing and game rights, and then there are a number on the left bank who purchased under the Land Acts of 1923 and 1927 and who did not secure the fishing rights. In effect, the position is——

Mr. Dillon

On a point of order. The matters now being raised relate more to the Department of Lands and the acquisition and disposition of fishing rights, and that is a matter for which I have no authority.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is a matter that would mainly concern the Department of Lands.

Mr. Ormonde

I do not intend to suggest legislation. I am merely dealing with the fishing rights of the people living on the banks of the Blackwater.

Mr. Dillon

I do not want to put the Deputy off, but I assure him that the problem is really one which concerns the Minister for Lands and I have no function at all in that connection. It is a matter of reserving fishing rights or transferring them on the occasion of the acquisition of an estate.

Mr. Ormonde

Perhaps the Minister would be kind enough to make a recommendation to the Minister for Lands?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister has no authority in relation to the matters with which the Deputy is dealing.

Mr. Ormonde

I suggest that the vesting of fishing rights in the tenants on both banks of our rivers would afford the best possible protection for our inland fisheries, as the local interest in fishing would be developed and, further, there would be a desire on the part of the tenant owners to protect their rights and in that way we would succeed in reducing poaching to a minimum. For that reason the Minister might recommend to the Minister for Lands the securing of these rights and the vesting of them in the tenants. I believe the tenants would be quite prepared to pay the fishing rent and compensate the owners, if it is necessary to do so. I feel sure they would be quite agreeable even to devote some portion of their annuities to that purpose.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I think the Deputy ought to pass from that matter now.

Mr. Ormonde

There is another matter which I would like to mention. It is the question of the operation of the weir on the River Blackwater at Lismore. I believe the operation of that weir is so conducted as seriously to affect the run of salmon to the upper reaches, thereby affording very poor fishing for the ordinary fisherman above the weir, while the Lismore estate—in other words, the Duke of Devonshire—reaps the benefit in securing tons of fish below the weir year after year. This weir is a barrier across the river. There is a narrow gap through which the water rushes and the fish have no way of going upstream except through this narrow gap. There is a period of 24 hours in every week when the gates in the weir are opened to permit the passage of fish upstream. In the interest of the anglers above the weir who pay thousands every year, I suggest that the Minister should have this matter investigated so as to ensure that the weir will not be operated in a way that will seriously impede the passage of the fish upstream.

I understand that the Minister received a deputation from the Waterford County Council some time ago. They made representations for the provision of a 100 per cent. State grant to improve the landing facilities for the fishermen at Ballymacaw. I understand that the cost would be about £1,100. The lack of proper landing facilities for the fishermen has definitely prevented the development of the fishing industry in that area. There could be considerable development of that industry if they were provided with proper facilities and amenities. The granting of the council's request would be a great benefit to the fishermen and would definitely help to encourage and develop the fishing industry there. If the Minister has not already arrived at a decision in that regard, I would appeal to him now to give the matter his very favourable consideration. The fishermen there have suffered great hardships in the past. Their difficulties are very considerable, because the landing facilities at the moment are such that they cannot bring their boats up on the shore. Their boats are very small indeed. They suffer as a result of these boats being broken up because they are unable to take them on the shore through lack of landing facilities. If the Minister has not already come to a decision in this regard perhaps he would give the matter favourable consideration.

Mr. Dunne

Deputy Burke earlier this evening made reference to his multifarious activities on behalf of the County Dublin inshore fishermen. With all due modesty he claimed that his representations to the Minister had resulted in the improvement of Loughshinny harbour. It surprised me to hear Deputy Burke, who last week described the Minister as a hypocrite, compliment him this evening upon his attitude and his policy towards the inshore fishermen. I suppose one must get used to changes of face in this House and surprises of one kind or another.

I find myself in agreement with the Minister in his attitude to the inshore-fishing industry as opposed to the proposal that we should have a deep-sea trawling industry. To me it is beyond question that there has to be a choice for one kind or the other. We have no choice. We must protect the industry which is in existence and which has been in existence for a long number of years. While much lip service has been paid to the fishermen and much has been said in their praise, so far I do not think it can be said that any Government has taken all the steps necessary to put this industry into its proper relationship to our national economy. The Minister indicated his view that the fishermen as such were not alone fishermen but were something in the nature of farmers as well. He said that most of them, as well as fishing, derived their livelihood mainly from the cultivation of the soil. That may be true along the western seaboard. I doubt if it is true on the east coast. So far as my experience goes, I would say that on the east coast the reverse is the case. From Dunmore East to Clogherhead the men who engage in fishing have no other means of livelihood. They are fishermen pure and simple. They have been fishermen for very many years.

Inshore fishing, circumscribed as it may be, is a very hazardous occupation and one which has never yet received its proper due from any Government. The basic problem in regard to this particular industry is the fact that we shall never in my view make it a really prosperous, thriving industry unless it is fully financed. Some Deputy indicated this evening that when we are thinking of bringing prosperity to our fishermen we should not think in terms of thousands or hundreds of thousands but in terms of millions. Deputies who represent constituencies that do not touch upon the sea may think that that is too large a demand to make upon the Exchequer. Those of us who have intimate knowledge and experience feel that the whole approach so far as finance is concerned has been niggardly. That is a bad thing. It has been said that there are only roughly 2,000 fishermen engaged in the industry. While the number actually engaged in fishing may be only 2,000, nevertheless that figure can be multiplied by at least five to discover all those who make their living from it. The potential number of people who could get a living from sea fishing is very great.

Prior to the time when this country secured a measure of independence every leader of this nation maintained that when we finally achieved independence our fishing industry would receive the beneficent attention of an Irish Government. I think that was one of the prominent points of policy in the programme of Sinn Féin. Despite the advent of three native Governments we have not yet reached the stage when the importance of this industry is fully realised. I think there is hope, however, that the present Minister realises that concrete steps must be taken to put this industry in a prosperous state. The first essential step is the allocation of sufficient money from the Exchequer in order to do that.

When one considers the need of the inshore fishing industry the first thing that springs to mind is the lack of proper harbour facilities. In Fingal we have four harbours well known to fishermen around our coast. They are Howth, Rush, Loughshinny and Skerries. Farther back than my experience goes there have been continual complaints from the fishermen using these harbours because of their inaccessibility and their utter inadequacy. In Howth and Loughshinny there has been a great deal of silting up with the result that on numerous occasions fishermen returning with their catch have been unable to make port. There have been considerable delays in securing the services of a dredger from the Board of Works. This problem of silting is one that affects every maritime county and we need far more dredger equipment than is available at the present time. I think that at the moment we have only two or three. These harbours silt up with fair regularity and I believe that we shall have to have much more than two or three dredgers in order to keep them clear. Last year we had a dredger in Balbriggan. For some reason—possibly one of urgency—it was taken away.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is the Minister responsible for the provision of dredgers?

Mr. Dunne

He is.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I do not see any provision in the Estimate for it. I do not think the Minister has any responsibility for the provision of dredgers.

Mr. Dillon

Howth Harbour is a State harbour for which the Board of Works is responsible. The Department of Fisheries has no function in regard to Howth Harbour. We have responsibility in regard to harbours which are primarily the responsibility of the local authority, but not in regard to State harbours.

Mr. Dunne

I may be in error in raising the matter on this particular Estimate but it is relevant to the discussion of the inshore fishing industry and it is something about which the fishermen continually complain. I think I may be forgiven for mentioning it. However, I shall pass from it now.

One of the great disabilities of fishermen is the fact that the type of boat at present supplied to them is not a fit boat for heavy weather, which means that when the weather is bad the fishermen must remain in harbour. Added to that, the harbours, in my constituency at any rate, are so constructed as to make shelter for any large type of boat a difficult proposition so that in order to secure improvement it is necessary that such harbours as come under the purview of the Minister should receive attention and should be improved. I refer to the fact that Deputy Burke in his extreme modesty claimed credit for securing improvement in Loughshinny. I do not wish to detract at all from the Herculean efforts of the Deputy in relation to his constituents but I think it is not unfair to say that he was not alone in his representations.

Mr. Dillon

That is true.

Mr. Dunne

In any event, I do not wish to labour this question but briefly the criticisms which have to be made as to the present state of the industry come under three heads. First of all, there are the harbours which I have mentioned. Secondly, there is the question of the catching capacity of the type of boats at present supplied. I had the pleasure and the honour to be present at the last meeting of the Sea Fisheries Association in Westport when fishermen from all over the country were discussing their needs and their grievances. The keynote of that particular discussion, as far as the fishermen were concerned, seemed to be their entire dissatisfaction with the present size of the sea fishery boats. It is felt that the larger boat, the 50-foot boat, would be of much greater service and value to them. That, of course, presupposes, as I have indicated earlier, that the harbours must be of such size and in such condition as will afford adequate protection for the larger type of boat.

Mr. Dillon

The Deputy will be glad to hear that that is the type of boat on which we are concentrating now.

Mr. Dunne

I am glad to hear that. We welcome also the intimation of the Minister that an effort is now being made to remedy the extreme shortage of boats which has been prevalent for the past few years. The Minister stated that he may be optimistic in anticipating that the greater part of the waiting list will be eliminated by the end of the financial year. If that can be done, it will certainly be a great achievement. There are many hundreds of fishermen who have been waiting patiently for some years for new boats and additional boats and if in the coming year the Minister succeeds in having their needs satisfied, he will be deserving of every compliment that can be paid him.

I think I referred last year to the question of fish distribution and it has been discussed at considerable length again this evening. It is an ironic commentary on this particular matter to find that when the Sea Fisheries Association met a couple of months ago in Westport, the fishermen assembled there on Friday could not get a bit of fish in that seaport town. That indicates the absolutely chaotic condition which exists so far as distribution is concerned. There does not seem to be any attempt made to cater for the adequate distribution of fish throughout the country. We have even cases, such as were indicated at Westport, where fish are landed in a seaport town, conveyed to Dublin and in some cases returned from Dublin to that town for sale. I have had the belief, strengthened by my conversations and discussions with fishermen for a long time, that, so far as distribution is concerned, there would appear very definitely to be a group of commercial gentlemen in this city who have a stranglehold on the distribution of fish. The return which the fisherman gets for the fish and the price the consumer has to pay in the shop are so vastly different as to be a matter of complete mystification to the ordinary layman. There does not seem to be any adequate explanation of it other than the fact that the distribution is controlled, as I have said, for purely commercial reasons and the public is at times held up to ransom for fish when it is in somewhat short supply and even at times when it is in large supply, by the distributors while at the same time we have the injustice perpetrated on the fisherman of the low inadequate return paid to him.

If there is one section of the community that deserve to get the consideration of the Minister in so far as he can give it to them, if there is one section that deserve to have every possible step taken by the State to help them, that section is the inshore fishermen. As I have said, the way in which they get their livelihood is the most hazardous in the State. I would ask the Minister to investigate thoroughly, if he has not already done so—it may well be that he has—all the circumstances surrounding the price which is paid to the fisherman for his fish and the price which is paid by the consumer in the City of Dublin and other cities and large towns in the country. This has been a matter of very much contention and complaint by fishermen for many years and it is high time something was done about it. It is beyond doubt that there is some degree of a racket in the sale of fish and that is something which we should not tolerate for one moment.

The three-mile limit has been mentioned. East coast fishermen and men from the harbours I have mentioned in my constituency—Howth, Rush, Lough-shinny, Skerries and Balbriggan—are suffering as the result of the Scottish ring-boats, which are well-equipped, large boats, coming inside the three-mile limit and in very many cases robbing the fishing grounds. These boats are vastly superior to anything which we have. Their condition is due, it can be said, to the fact that they were part and parcel of the British war effort. They are equipped with all sorts of fish-finding apparatus, radio-telephonic communication, and our fishermen have no chance whatever of competing with them. There are undoubted difficulties in so far as trawlers are concerned but these difficulties would be lessened if the three-mile limit were extended to something in the region of six to ten miles. I do not suggest that that is a matter than can be easily accomplished but an important consideration is that the three-mile limit was the result of an international convention which took place about 45 years ago. When that is borne in mind I think it will be recognised that it is high time a change was made.

A Deputy

Will you get more fish when that happens?

Mr. Dunne

I imagine, in fact I am sure, that we will get more fish, and I am certain also that the livelihood of our own native fishermen will be protected. It would be far better to have that protection than to have the Scottish boats, the Grimsby boats, coming to our shores and taking what fish there is while our men come back with their boats empty. I think that is something to which the Minister should bend his mind and energies. Deputy Lemass indicated, by way of interruption, that the previous Government had set in train some steps in that direction and I would like to hear, if the Minister has any information on that particular matter, if any steps have ever been taken to remedy the question of the three-mile limit and, if so, how far this project can be furthered. I am convinced, and the fishermen are definitely of the opinion, that before they can have a fair and reasonable chance of winning a livelihood from the sea they should at least get the protection of an extension of the three-mile limit so as to make it more difficult for foreign trawlers to come in and rob them of what is rightfully the property of this nation, the fish around our shores.

While the Minister is replying I would be glad if he would indicate if he has given consideration to the possibility of the development of our ports by means of the use of some Marshall Aid. Any moneys we garner under that scheme would be very well applied if they were applied to the improvement and enlargement of our fishing ports. I ask the Minister finally to approach this whole problem of fishing with a determination to make it what many people state and claim it is and what, in fact, it is not yet, a major industry. It cannot be said to be a major industry at the present moment as it is a very much neglected industry. I compliment the Minister upon his determination that we shall not have a deep-sea trawling industry because of the possible danger that would ensue for the inshore men, but I would ask him to bring a new attitude to it and to try to get his Department to take an entirely new view of this industry with a view to making it something it should be—the most important industry in this country after agriculture.

Mr. T. Brennan

I speak as one who has looked for a great many years on the fishing industry as being basically second only to our main industry, agriculture. I always took a certain amount of interest in that industry and while I cannot claim to speak as thoroughly in connection with that all important industry as those who reside on the coast itself, as representing a constituency in which there is a fishing port, probably as large a fishing port as there is on any part of the coast of Ireland, I should like to draw the Minister's attention to the number of difficulties with which the fishermen of that port of Arklow have to contend from time to time while they are engaged in what I might call that hazardous trade of fishing. Their work is hazardous and having carried out that work inasmuch as they have gone to sea, sometimes in very bad weather, they find that due to the fact that the bar of the port of Arklow, which becomes silted with sands periodically, is in such a state that they are unable to bring their fish into port, they have to run into some other port in order to dispose of the fish they have caught practically in their own waters. Some Deputies this evening have supported the idea not alone of helping the inshore fishing industry but also of developing the deep-sea fishing industry. That may be all right but I would suggest—and I should like to see it carried out—that every effort on the part of the Minister and the Department responsible be put into effect to ensure that the difficulties with which those inshore fishermen have to contend will be wiped out and, having been wiped out, that their catch can be disposed of when it is brought into port. If that is done, when fish is available they can go out every night and bring in the fish, sure of the fact that they can dispose of it. I have known occasions in Arklow when there was, if you like, a glut of fish and the fishermen were informed, after two or three nights fishing the result of which was a great catch, by those who were responsible for disposing of their fish not to go out that night, that there was no use in going out because there was no market for fish.

Mr. Dillon

What sort of fish would this be?

Mr. T. Brennan

Herrings, in particular. I am glad to see that the Minister has provided a large amount of money this year for boats and gear. Now that the emergency is over and engines and timber are available, I hope the full amount will be expended during the year. I hope that, when allocating the boats, the Minister will keep Arklow in mind, where quite a number of people are anxious to secure boats.

Mr. Dillon

I am sure the Deputy would approve of the Minister keeping a million miles away from the allocation. I certainly ought to. It is a matter for the board, not for me.

Mr. T. Brennan

The Minister is responsible, is he not? If I refer to the board, the Leas-Cheann Comhairle might say I should refer to the Minister. I hope the board or the Minister, or whoever is responsible for allocating the boats, will keep in mind the town of Arklow and give fair and due consideration to any applications received from the people there.

On the question of silting, I hope it is not irrelevant to mention that those responsible for Arklow Harbour naturally take a great interest in the sea fishing industry. They have been very worried over the silting up of the bar, because of its effect on the fishing. I think the Department of Fisheries have been worried over it also, as when approached they took steps to ensure that the wherewithal would be provided to relieve the position that arises there. The real point is that the sum of money involved annually, in order to keep the bar clear for the fishermen and other boats coming in, is becoming such a strain on the harbour commissioners that they are suggesting, or have suggested, that certain steps be taken to avoid that annual outlay. They asked for expert opinion to find other ways and means to prevent the silting. I would ask the Minister and the Department to give due consideration to any application in connection with this matter, so that the Arklow Harbour Board may be relieved once and for all of the financial strain which comes, not only annually but at different periods of the year.

Regarding inland fisheries, I understood the Minister to express himself last year regarding fishing rights on rivers by stating to the House that he hoped to see the day when every man could walk in on a river bank and have his bit of sport by fishing as he wished.

Mr. Dillon

It is a beau ideal.

Mr. T. Brennan

I think the Minister expressed himself so.

Mr. Dillon

Yes.

Mr. T. Brennan

I would be glad to see that day also. I remember the time when that position practically did obtain on the rivers. It was only when the different Land Acts became operative that this monopoly of the fishing rights on different rivers developed. If the Minister, through nationalisation or otherwise, can do anything to make the rivers of the country available to every individual who is prepared to bind himself to whatever regulations are laid down, so that he would have the right to go in on any river and fish there, everyone will be pleased throughout the country.

Deputy O'Higgins referred to poaching on inland rivers. I have a fair idea of some of those rivers and, although I read reports of the different conservators at their meetings, I believe that poaching is a dying-out practice, though I am sure a certain amount of it still goes on. In order to ensure that the proper civic spirit will be created, as suggested by Deputy O'Higgins, the sooner the Minister or the Department responsible leaves the rivers in that position whereby the man who is fond of sport can go in on any bank and fish to his heart's content, the better it will be. On the day that happens, poaching as an illegal action will cease to be of any great importance.

Mr. C. Lehane

I do not subscribe to the view that there is of necessity any essential conflict between the interests of the inshore fishermen and the development of a deep-sea fishing industry. In my view, if a fishing industry is to be developed here—and apparently that is the view accepted on all sides of the House—it is essential that we should attempt the creation of a deep-sea fishing fleet. I would view with considerable apprehension allowing that development into the hands of private enterprise. It is something which should be undertaken by the community in the interests of the community. Many continental countries have successfully developed deep-sea fishing industries, working on the principle of the factory or master ship with its attendant trawlers. I gather from what the Minister said in opening the debate that that was a view he could not accept. May I say that the Minister is an eminently reasonable man in many respects and there are many views the Minister did not hold which he now regards with considerable favour? I am not hopeless of the Minister's conversion to my point of view in this respect.

The greater portion of the debate was devoted to our inshore fishing industry. The references made by Deputy Brennan to our inland fisheries and to what the Minister described as the beau ideal are references which would commend themselves to me. I should like to see the day when all our inland fisheries were the property of the people of this nation, and, though the Minister may describe it as a beau ideal and one which I gathered from the tone of his interjection he imagines is not possible of any immediate fulfilment, let me at least express this hope, that we will not, for very much longer, have to put up with the spectacle of some of our richest rivers, rivers teeming with fish, the private preserve of aliens and foreigners, as is the case to-day.

In so far as our inshore fishing industry is concerned, discussion of it must fall under four main heads: gear, in which I include boats, harbours, marketing and protection. In the remarks which Deputy Dunne addressed to the House, and I think that many other speakers supported him, I would concur. I think the Minister should decide that, if we are to develop our inshore fishing industry, we will have to spend much more money on it than we are spending at present. We will have to see that those who put out in boats to win fish will put out in good boats equipped with the best possible gear available and with all necessary devices, such as wireless and any other protective apparatus necessary.

Anybody who knows our western coastline, and even the Leinster coastline, knows the extent to which the activities of our fishermen are circumscribed, due to lack of proper harbour facilities. Some of these harbours are not the responsibility of the Minister, but others of them are, and, in respect of those which are, let the Minister show a lead to his colleague, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance.

One of the difficulties facing the Minister, and anybody interested in the development of our fishing industry, is the mental attitude of many people towards fish as a food. I think it was during the period of office of the previous Administration that an attempt was made for a while to educate the public taste in that matter. That was a creditable attempt and I commend it to the Minister for emulation by him and his Department.

The fourth aspect of this problem which I suggest to the Minister for his consideration is that which I have listed under protection. I await with interest a statement from the Minister on the position with regard to the extension of the three-mile limit. To my mind, that extension is overdue, but whether the limit is extended or not, I am appalled—unless I misinterpret the Minister—to gather from him that he feels that more protection cannot be given, even within the three-mile limit, to those fishing from our shores. Two years ago, in the course of about an hour and a half, I saw in the harbour of Bantry 24 Spanish trawlers. An hour and a half later, in the harbour of Castletownberehaven, I saw 18 Spanish trawlers—these boats coming to our shores and taking from under the very noses of the fishermen fishing along our coast the means of making a proper livelihood.

I do not think that is an insoluble problem and I do not think it is a difficult problem. It is one which could be solved by the Minister, in collaboration with the Minister for Defence. I do not know whether corvettes are the answer to poaching within the three-mile limit. Some few years ago it was suggested here that the proper answer was an organised aerial patrol, and, if I am right in interpreting the Minister's attitude, I am appalled that he should think this a matter in which he can do nothing.

Mr. Dillon

I do not know where the Deputy got that idea.

Mr. C. Lehane

I may have misunderstood the Minister and I should be very glad to hear that I have. I did interpret the Minister as saying— I am attempting to paraphrase the Minister—that the present poaching within the three-mile limit was something for which he had no immediate remedy. I would suggest that the development of an aerial patrol for the proper protection of boats fishing from our shores is something which should engage his immediate attention.

Mr. Palmer

So far as I am concerned, I am perfectly satisfied with everything that the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries has done since he came into office. Previously, fishermen had to deposit 50 per cent. of the purchase price of boats and gear. The Minister has reduced that to 20 per cent. and he has stated that where a fisherman can show that he has fulfilled all his previous commitments, he will not be left without gear. The Minister is going to expend £40,000,000 on drainage, reclamation and rehabilitation of land. May I suggest that he should spend £1,000,000, £500,000 or £250,000 on putting the fishing industry on a proper basis? In this country, agriculture comes first and I maintain that the fishing industry comes next. If that were done, fishermen would be enabled to get boats and gear and would then be in a position to do their work properly. I am sure that efforts have been made to procure boats from various countries and there is still a hope that they can be obtained. I would ask the Minister to purchase boats from France, Spain, Denmark, even England, or boats that would be built in Belfast. It might be a nice gesture to give them an opportunity of helping our industry here. Although the facilities in Killybegs, County Donegal, are as good as the facilities afforded in any country in Europe, perhaps something could be done to enlarge the space for boat building.

As a safety measure, there should be look-out posts along the coast. The posts are already in existence and only need to be equipped with suitable apparatus. That would be a safety measure for fishermen when fishing within a certain distance of the land. I would also suggest that, in certain areas, there should be a mechanic to look after the engines of the boats. For instance, in South Kerry—in fact, in the whole of Kerry—there should be a special man to look after the engines and carry out repairs. There is great difficulty when there is a break-down and the fishermen have to wait a long time before help comes from Cork or Baltimore.

I want to say a special word about Kenmare Bay. In former years, there were oyster beds in the bay. They have been destroyed. Recently, an attempt was made to plant the seed of oysters but in a different place from where the oyster beds were previously. There is one particular place, Garnish Island, in Kenmare Bay, which is really a Riviera. Tropical plants grow there and I believe that would be a very suitable place for the planting of oyster seed. During the war people were so anxious to make all the money they could out of lobster fishing in Kenmare Bay that they actually fished the hen lobster and at present there is no lobster fishing there. I would ask the Minister to look into the matter of the oyster beds and lobster beds, which is so very important in that particular area.

Perhaps the Minister could use his influence to improve the piers in Reenard, Ballinskelligs and Valentia. It is not in any criticism of the Minister that I have spoken, because I know he has done his best. When he came into office, he found an industry for which there was no gear or protection. During the past 15 or 16 years, nothing at all had been done. It was absolutely destroyed. The fishermen are hopeful, now that we have this Minister, that, just as he has improved agriculture, in the very near future he will place the fishing industry on a proper basis and that our fishermen around the coast and the inshore fishermen will be afforded every facility to enable them to make a good living from the industry in which they are engaged.

Mr. Allen

There are a few matters on which I want to get some information from the Minister. One of them is the improvement of harbours. The Minister has some responsibility, I take it, for improving small fishing harbours. There are such harbours in Wexford in connection with which there are applications before the Minister at present for improvement grants. The fishermen in the Cahore area are very disappointed that nothing has been done about it. The Wexford County Council, who have no responsibility for providing capital for the improvement of harbours, have offered to put up 40 per cent. of the cost and the Department or the Minister, so far, has not given any decision as to providing the balance. A good number of fishermen in that area are anxiously awaiting the Minister's decision. It would be a small grant, of £2,000 or £3,000. I do not know exactly what it would be. They ask to have a boat safe erected in the village of Cahore.

Mr. Dillon

That is the scheme the Deputy came to see me about with the deputation?

Mr. Allen

That is true. It is hanging fire.

Mr. Dillon

It is not hanging fire. The Board of Works are preparing alternative plans.

Mr. Allen

The local authority, who have no responsibility for providing capital for that, offered to put up a grant of 40 per cent. of the cost almost 12 months ago, and the Minister has not given any decision as to whether he is going to provide a grant or not.

Mr. Dillon

The Board of Works are preparing alternative plans.

Mr. Allen

If your Department and yourself were interested and pressed the Board of Works to provide a grant it would have been done. The good weather for doing that type of work is going by very fast. If the work is not undertaken inside the next couple of months it will not be possible to do anything before the herring fishing season opens in October or November of the present year and the people in question are mainly interested in that. I want to press the Minister to have a decision reached immediately in that connection.

Mr. Dillon

The Deputy wants me to do in two or three months what his Party did not do in 14 years.

Mr. Allen

Sixteen years, we will be told.

Mr. Dillon

No, 14.

Mr. Allen

It is only within the last year that this thing has become a matter of urgency. Whatever works were there, there was sea erosion. The men have to haul the boats through the surf to the sand. They have lost something like four or five motor boats in a number of years. There was no protection for boats there. The little harbour was never fit to moor boats in stormy weather and the fishermen had to haul them on to the strand. These people are expecting and anxiously awaiting some information as to whether they will be allowed to proceed with the proposal to erect a boat safe there. The cost would not be very much. Over a great number of years it has been found very difficult to get any grant towards the improvement of harbours from the Minister or the Department of Fisheries. The local authority have responsibility for the maintenance of a number of small fishing harbours—let us say the county council. These harbours need capital improvement works but the Department of Fisheries have not been a bit helpful. It is not only this year or last year or five years ago that that has been so. I have never found them a bit co-operative in providing help to local authorities to improve those harbours. We would ask the Minister to try and have the policy altered in that respect and to encourage the local authorities who are anxious to improve those small harbours by giving them portion of the capital cost. That should be done. Whether there is anything in this Vote or not, I am sure that if the Minister is inclined to do that he will find some means of getting the money.

I am glad to see that there is a larger allocation in the Estimate for the present year for the provision of boats and gear. We hope that those engines will become available in the boats and that it will be possible for all this money, and somewhat more, to be spent. During all the war years, when it was not possible to have the engines will become available for the in the old boats replaced, the inshore fishermen had great difficulty in carrying on at all. Much can be done in that direction. The general complaint I hear from fishermen, from old salts who have spent their lives at the sea, is that the boats provided by the Sea Fisheries Association are too small.

Mr. Dillon

We are concentrating on 50-foot boats now.

Mr. Allen

A larger and heavier type of boat is required because of the difficulties in stormy weather. I think I am correct in saying that the largest proportion of the fish is brought to shore during the winter months. It is absolutely necessary to have a larger and heavier boat than the type formerly provided by the Sea Fisheries Association. All inshore fishermen will tell you that.

There seems to be a difference of opinion on the question of whether all fish should be landed by the inshore fishermen or whether there should be a deep-sea fishing fleet. To come to any decision in that regard would, I think, be a matter of great difficulty. There will always be room for conflicting points of view on that question. From anything I ever heard about it, if we have an exportable surplus of fish the question arises whether our fishermen would be prepared to sell at the price it would fetch in some of the export markets. I understand that our men would not be prepared to do so. I understand that it would not be economic from their point of view to export it at the price Norwegians, Danes and others would be prepared to accept for it. I do not know whether that is true but I believe it is substantially true. Norwegians, Danes and others are prepared to work for a much lower return to themselves than our fishermen might be. I am told that there is a lot in that.

Mr. Dillon

I do not think there is anything at all in that, Deputy.

Mr. S. Collins

The Deputy is only wasting time.

Mr. Allen

If the Minister has an exportable surplus of fish and tries to sell it across the water he will find that his return will be much less than that for fish sold in this country.

Mr. Dillon

Does the Deputy advise me to have a deep-sea trawling fleet or not?

Mr. Allen

The Minister has to make that decision at the present time——

Mr. Dillon

He will not say yes and he will not say no.

Mr. Allen

I do not think I could advise the Minister on that point.

Mr. Dillon

Would you blame me for giving him a short answer?

Mr. Allen

Try and keep quiet for a few moments.

Mr. S. Collins

Are you yourself not obstructing?

Mr. Allen

The Minister and I might cross swords. If he gave short answers I could give other short answers.

Mr. S. Collins

The Deputy is wasting time nicely.

Mr. Allen

I believe that there is room for both inshore and deep-sea fishing.

Mr. Dillon

My God—on both sides now.

Mr. Allen

There is plenty of room on both sides.

Captain Cowan

On the ocean.

Mr. Allen

Inshore fishing is partly dying out—for what reason I do not know. Inshore fishermen are becoming more and more scarce in the little fishing villages all over the country. The men are getting old and they are retiring from fishing. Their sons are not replacing them except in a few instances. That is the truth. The conditions of livelihood these people were prepared to accept 20, 30 or 50 years ago are not acceptable to the young men of to-day. They must have fulltime employment. The young men will leave the fishing villages sooner than accept the part-time livelihood inshore fishing gives them. It is an uncertain life. I am sure the Minister is aware, and his Department can advise him on it, that the number of young men engaging in fishing, and likely to continue at it, is very small at the present time. He may have people who have some other means of livelihood——

Mr. Dillon

Ten thousand are engaged in it.

Mr. Allen

If they have some other means of livelihood in the district they will continue to fish but if they have no means of livelihood other than the uncertainty of inshore fishing you cannot be very sure you will get the full supply of fish needed in this country from the inshore fishermen. Many Deputies seem to think there are great possibilities for selling fish in this country in the future. Personally I believe there are not. We will never become a fish-eating people.

Mr. C. Lehane

We could encourage our people to do so.

Mr. Allen

We have never been a fish-eating people—probably since our grandfathers' time or before it. I suppose that, whether the people can afford it or not, we prefer fresh meat. I move to report progress.

Progress reported. Committee to sit again to-morrow.

The Dáil adjourned at 12 midnight until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 25th May, 1949.