Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 31 May 1950

Vol. 121 No. 7

Committee on Finance. - Vote 72—Technical Assistance.

Minister for Finance (Mr. McGilligan)

I move:—

That a sum not exceeding £150,000 be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1951, for Grants-in-Aid in connection with Technical Assistance afforded by the United States Economic Co-operation Administration.

Deputies will remember that on the Financial Statement, when I was referring to extra expenses during the year 1950-51, I mentioned a scheme for which an Estimate of £150,000 would be introduced to encourage firms and individuals to avail of technical assistance which is being afforded by the United States Economic Co-Operation Administration.

The "procurement and furnishing of technical information and assistance" is one of the forms of aid mentioned in the United States Economic Co-operation Act of 1948. The Economic Co-operation Administration has set aside for technical assistance to this country for the year ending 30th June, 1950; a sum of $100,000; a further $300,000 has been tentatively earmarked for Ireland for the American fiscal year 1950-51.

Technical assistance is being afforded by the Economic Co-operation Administration mainly in two forms. People in this country having a particular problem may visit the United States to study how their problem is being dealt with there. In such cases the Economic Co-operation Administration will make the necessary arrangements for visits to suitable centres and will pay the expenses in the United States of the persons concerned. United States experts may also visit Ireland to study technical problems and local conditions affecting them, and advise producers here on the best way of overcoming those problems. In such cases the Economic Co-operation Administration will pay the experts' dollar fees.

It would normally be necessary for the Irish beneficiaries of the Economic Co-operation Administration dollar aid in the form of technical assistance to pay the equivalent in Irish pounds of the dollars made available so that a deposit could be made accordingly in the Grant Counterpart Special Account in the Central Bank. In addition they would have to pay their full travelling expenses to and from the United States or, as the case might be, the travelling, subsistence and other necessary non-dollar expenses of visiting United States experts.

In order, however, to ensure that the maximum advantage is taken of this generous United States offer of technical assistance, the Government have decided to make money available in the case of approved projects so that:—

(1) It will not be necessary for participants to make any payment against the dollar expenses; and

(2) One half of the remaining expenses will be defrayed by the Government.

The effect will be to make the Economic Co-operation Administration technical assistance available for only a fraction of the total cost.

Technical assistance projects must be approved by the Government and by the Economic Co-operation Administration. Approval can be given only where the projects will contribute materially to the economic development of the country.

During the past ten years great technical and scientific advances have been made in industry and agriculture, particularly in the United States of America, and much of the latest technical information is available only from that country. Many firms and individuals have been anxious to bring their production methods and techniques up to date but have been hindered by the dollar shortage and by the cost, which is often beyond the resources of small concerns. The Government hope that the subventions from this Vote will secure that the maximum use is made of the opportunities afforded by the Economic Co-operation Administration scheme.

Suitable publicity for the scheme is being arranged.

The provision of £50,000 in sub-head A of the Estimate is intended to cover 50 per cent. of the non-dollar expenditure arising out of approved projects and the £100,000 in sub-head B is to enable the counterpart of dollar assistance afforded by Economic Co-operation Administration to be lodged in the Grant Counterpart Special Account in the Central Bank as required by the Economic Co-operation Agreement with the United States. Of the £150,000 to be expended by the Government under the scheme £50,000 will, with the agreement of Economic Co-operation Administration, be offset by a transfer of £50,000 into the Exchequer from the Grant Counterpart Special Account. Both sub-heads are Grants-in-Aid, and provision is made for transfer of the grants into deposit accounts so as to provide funds from which these subventions towards Economic Co-operation Administration technical assistance can be met after the end of the current financial year.

The technical assistance provisions are only a part but a very valuable and significant part of the benevolences which America is affording to European countries and to this country in connection with Marshall Aid. The Economic Co-operation Administration people themselves regard technical assistance as being of the highest importance. If proper use is made of it, it should result in a considerable improvement in business methods and technique here and give a return which would undoubtedly be quite commensurate with the expenditure involved—and the country is likely to benefit by it. Whatever provision has been made for technical assistance, that may be used—if it is used—to the maximum without in any way diminishing the amount of Economic Co-operation Administration dollars made available for the purchase of dollar commodities. There has been quite an amount of assistance already approved by Economic Co-operation Administration.

A number of officials, mainly from the Department of Agriculture, have already had the benefit of assistance of the type which I have mentioned in connection with such subjects as soil science, animal genetics, infertility and sterility in live stock, artificial insemination, pig diseases, poultry diseases, parasitic diseases of live stock and poultry husbandry technique. These would be all, in the main, projects that have been developed by officers of the Department of Agriculture. There is a project for attendance at "open house for rural youth leaders" sponsored by the United States Department of Agriculture. The attendance will include an officer from the Department of Education and the secretary of the farmers' youth movement. In connection with poultry husbandry technique and agricultural economics, certain officers have been approved and will be travelling in connection with these matters one of these days.

I am sure Deputies know from Press reports, if not otherwise, that a mining expert is coming to this country to advise on the development of gypsum deposits. That scheme has been fully approved by the Economic Co-operation Administration. Schemes for which approval has been sought include the visit of certain engineers to assist Bord na Móna to help solve certain problems in connection with their work. A delegation in connection with hotels has already visited the United States. Another visit of Irish hoteliers is projected for the autumn. In return United States tourist experts are expected to visit and carry out a survey here. There are other schemes which are being put forward but have not yet been fully approved. Certain engineers of the Electricity Supply Board hope to visit America for technical assistance and certain Aer Lingus officials will also go there. There are other projects which have not yet reached the stage of being even tentatively approved.

I mention these matters to show the scope and diversity which we may expect from this generosity on the part of the United States Government. I believe that considerable benefit will accrue to the economy of the country from the expenditure involved in this. The departmental officers dealing with these matters have been greatly encouraged and helped by Mr. Carrigan, the Economic Co-operation Administration administrator, and his officers. His great kindness and the expertness of his approach to everything makes all this work quite happy and easy. We may expect to experience the same kindness in connection with the provision of technical aid from the American side. The proposals that are put up here have to be screened from the American side and approved there. So far from there being any complaint in regard to the projects not being met in the best way, undoubtedly there has been such a situation that I feel that I should mark some appreciation of it here and of the help that has been given to enable this country to reap the fullest possible benefit from all the moneys which are being so generously distributed under the Marshall Plan.

Mr. Aiken

I take it that it would be more appropriate to discuss the details of this particular scheme when the Estimates for the various Departments are brought forward, and that the Departments dealing with the various branches of our economy will justify their recommendations to the Dáil. There is no doubt but that we are deeply indebted to the American people and the American Government for their generosity. I feel sure that, if proper use is made of the technical assistance they have offered, good work can be done in the development of our resources here and in the improvement of our technique.

The Minister has said that already some officers from the Department of Agriculture have gone. I take it that this money will enable officers of other Departments to go if they feel that their visits will be of benefit to the country and if the Americans approve of their visit. I am sure that, on the various Estimates, we will get more details than the Minister can give at present. I am sure, too, that we all approve of the Supplementary Estimate.

Captain Cowan

I felt that the Minister, in introducing this Estimate in an apologetic manner—I got that impression—was doing something that he did not like to do. The American legislation under which this provision is made was passed for the purpose of the protection of the United States. It was so declared in the American Parliament. Looking at this in a broad way, we find there is provision whereby America is to assist us in our agricultural development. They are to provide experts to indicate to us how we should develop our agriculture. It has been stated—I do not think it has been contradicted—that the Economic Co-operation Administration administrator in this country has declared that our function in the world was to be an agricultural community and not an industrial community.

I understood for a while, when those great schemes of land reclamation introduced by the Minister for Agriculture were announced at first, that those were schemes which the Minister for Agriculture himself had developed. I find now that, instead of those schemes being schemes of an Irish Minister for Agriculture, they are the schemes of the American agricultural adviser to the Government of this country. Agriculture is our primary industry. While I agree that certain technical advice is useful in agriculture as in everything else, I find that this is developing not only into agriculture but into Bord na Móna, into our gypsum deposits, into our tourist industry, into the development of our rural youth leaders—whoever they are or what they are I do not know.

Mr. Corry

Blueshirts?

Captain Cowan

Deputy Corry, who knows more about agriculture than I do, may be able to help me out on that. I want to know and the country wants to know clearly if there is any phase of our economic and political activity into which the Government of the United States has not thrust its nose. Even in the speech made by the Minister, the speech which I describe properly as an apologetic speech, is there any phase of our activity into which the Government of the United States is not pushing its finger? Why are they doing this? Are they doing this for our good or, as is stated in their own legislation and by their own legislators, for the protection of the people of the United States of America? The Minister and Deputy Aiken have referred to the generosity of America. Where is the generosity to us if they are doing something for their own purposes? If their expert advice will lead to a complete change in our own programme of industrial development, what are we to be thankful for?

If the Minister were to come in here and say that the United States Government, because of its aid to this country, as they term it, under the Marshall Plan, insists on doing those things, then we would know where we stood. The people have a right to know where they stand. We had, 700 years ago, the intervention of another country in the affairs of this State, and it has taken us 700 years to remove that intervention from part of our territory. I am quite sure that, in those days 700 years back, there were people who talked about the generosity of the English people. In a world situation such as it is to-day, we ought to be very careful about what we do and, before we decide, we should think very clearly why we are doing it. I believe, and the majority of thinking people in this country believe, that we are not free agents any more in this matter, that the Minister is not a free agent, that the Government is not a free agent. The type of speech which the Minister made here and the type of speech which Deputy Aiken made, would indicate that we are not free agents in this matter. We are part of a generation that has made tremendous sacrifices to obtain our own freedom and to preserve our own liberties. Now, those are important matters, matters that should concern every responsible person in the country; and we cannot permit a situation of drift or slide to develop in which those liberties and that freedom would be imperilled or endangered. It is being imperilled and endangered every day, not in our interests but in the interests of the United States of America, as set out in their own legislation.

In this House I, apparently, am a voice in the wilderness. However, I will continue to make that voice heard and, thanks be to God, we have preserved sufficient liberty in this country to enable even one voice to be heard. If we continue in the way we are going, the voice of a free individual will not be permitted in this country in the very near future. That is the danger that I see; that is the danger to which I wish to draw the attention of the Irish people. I spoke here in connection with the Marshall Plan a couple of years ago. I was then a single individual.

An Ceann Comhairle

Will the Deputy remember that it was then approved by the House? He is travelling rather wide now.

Captain Cowan

I said I was then a single individual—one against 145, the Chair being neutral—but in the two years that have passed since then, a very substantial number of people have come to approve of the expressions I used in that discussion. I can only issue a warning to the people, that they are being led along very dangerous and slippery slopes. I say very clearly to my fellow-members of this House that a day may come in the very near future when they will regret, and sincerely regret, the fact that they have not taken sufficiently serious notice of this very dangerous position in which we find ourselves.

Being opposed as I am to that dangerous drift in which our Minister, our Government, and our chief political leaders are not free agents, I can only repeat what I said here two years ago, that I cannot approve, by any vote of mine, either legislation or a Vote such as has been introduced here this evening by the Minister.

Mr. Cogan

I cannot claim to be an expert in the interpretation of tones such as Deputy Cowan appears to be, but I did not detect any tone of apology, any note of apology, in the Minister's introduction of this Supplementary Estimate.

I think it is a desirable thing that this free nation should co-operate with another free nation in advancing science and knowledge, particularly if it relates to increasing the productivity of our agricultural and other resources. I cannot see any great danger arising from our endeavours to secure from the United States that technical knowledge which is essential in the combating of disease among live stock, in the improvement of our soil, and in the development of our tourist and other industries. I do not think that the experts from the United States who are sent over here to assist in the development of our mineral resources, for example, will carry away any of our valuable ores or any other deposits which may lie beneath our soil.

In a matter of this kind we should, as a free people, be willing to co-operate with other free people. Very useful work can be done under this proposal. It is essential, however, that the expert knowledge obtained will be turned to the best possible advantage. It is essential that the people who go over to the United States to study these technical matters will be people with sound ideas, people of energy who are determined to carry progressive ideas into effect. I do not think this is a matter which should be left entirely to civil servants. I, therefore, welcome the proposal to send to the United States members of various progressive agricultural organisations and people engaged in industry or in the hotel business.

There is no doubt that in industrial and technical knowledge the people of the United States have travelled very far ahead of the rest of the world, in many directions at any rate, and there is no doubt our people could learn quite a lot from them. To suggest that by such co-operation we may lose some portion of our independence is absolutely absurd. At the present time our people are studying in the university known as the cinema. What they see there comes mainly from American sources and if there is anything more likely to weaken our sense of nationality and independence it would be that particular type of study. But to suggest that by an investigation of our resources, by the study of American methods in industry and agriculture, we are going to weaken our national position in any way, is absolutely ridiculous. Perhaps it is a good thing that some member of the House should express the views which Deputy Cowan has expressed, just to show how ridiculous they are.

As an Independent Deputy, I want to say that the 145 Deputies who supported the idea of Marshall Aid a couple of years ago and put Deputy Cowan in a minority of one were absolutely realistic in their approach to present-day problems. I do not think Deputy Cowan would be leading this country in the direction of maintaining its independence by taking up an attitude of non-co-operation in relation to everything suggested by the United States; I have a feeling he would be leading us in exactly the opposite direction.

Mr. McGilligan

I think it is necessary to clear up one or two doubts that would appear to have arisen because, perhaps, of the emphasis laid on certain things. Amongst the matters mentioned by me as already approved there loomed rather largely projects either of a Government type or a type sponsored by Government— a Government agency or a semi-Government agency. Private individuals and private businesses would seem to be rather afraid of what their commitments might be until the situation is clarified. I hope it will be clarified by what has been said here this evening and by the further clarification which will occur when the publicity I have mentioned will have been given to the scheme.

Private business firms and organisations are beginning to show their appreciation, even with their limited knowledge and even with their natural fear with regard to their commitments. That is the position, if one can judge by the variety and extent of some schemes that are rolling in for consideration by the Government. After they have been passed they are then ready for presentation to the Economic Co-operation Administration for approval. The balance has been brought definitely on the side of Government agencies or Government-sponsored agencies, but I think there will be a balance the other way, a balance roughly between them and other schemes.

I mentioned that certain projects have been sent forward for examination. It must be remembered that the initiative in these things rests with the Government. Schemes may be sent in by outside people and they would fall for consideration by the Economic Co-operation Administration here. I do not think they would be empowered to take up anything on their own and, therefore, the initiative must come through Government sponsoring, through Government blessing of a particular project which will then be brought to the Economic Co-operation Administration for their approval.

It is almost an impertinence to refer to this, because it may cause doubts and suspicious, but there has not been any question of dictation about this matter. I mention that in order to allay the suspicions or the fears to which Deputy Cowan has given expression. Nobody has thought of this in terms of dictation or pressure. That should be clearly understood. In the agreement between the Minister for External Affairs and the American representatives it was resolved that the Economic Co-operation Administration approval must be given to a scheme, but it is not in their control to force any scheme and they have no thought of forcing a scheme. I hope that is quite clear.

So far as the matters to which Deputy Cowan has referred are concerned, it is, I suppose, true to say that in the majority of cases, in the greater number of instances, what is likely to be said on the technical side would have a bearing on agriculture. That is only natural seeing that this is mainly an agricultural country and that it is dependent almost entirely on the main industry, agriculture. I did mention already even in connection with this list of matters already approved or at some stage of its advancement towards approval, the question of gypsum and the question of the visit to the United States of certain officials in connection with engineering projects under Bord na Móna. I know that to the jaundiced mind that would only mean that agriculture has been put under the control of the American Government or that even such things as the deposit of gypsum or the engineering projects of Bord na Móna will come under the control of the American Government through their administration here. Deputy Cowan has said that this whole project is a project for the defence of America. The Economic Co-operation Agreement between the United States and this country, of the 28th July, 1948, has this in its preamble:—

"The Governments of Ireland and the United States of America, recognising that the restoration or maintenance in European countries of principles of individual liberty, free institutions, and genuine independence rests largely upon the establishment of sound economic conditions, stable international economic relationships, and the achievement by the countries of Europe of a healthy economy independent of extraordinary outside assistance, ..."

Captain Cowan

Will the Minister read the preamble to the American Act?

Mr. McGilligan

The Deputy can read that if he likes but this is the agreement that was signed by the representatives of the two Governments. The Deputy writes down all those who are engaged in this country in carrying out the conditions of this agreement as hypocrites of the first order. Is there any justification for that suspicion which seems to lurk in the Deputy's mind in any part of that phrase:—

"...recognising that the restoration or maintenance in European countries of principles of individual liberty, free institutions and genuine independence rests largely upon the establishment of sound economic conditions, stable international economic relationships and the achievement by the countries of Europe of a healthy economy independent of extraordinary outside assistance, ..."

Surely there is a recognition by the American Government that in so far as they were making available this extraordinary outside assistance to countries which had applied for it, to that extent the economic independence and national independence of these countries might be prejudiced and they state that their one aim was to help these countries towards a healthy economy, independent of extraordinary outside assistance,

"recognising that a strong and prosperous European economy is essential for the attainment of the purposes of the United Nations".

Then they call for a strong production effort and they speak of having enacted the Economic Co-operation Act of 1948

"providing for the furnishing of assistance by the United States of America to nations participating in a joint programme for European recovery, in order to enable such nations, through their own individual and concerted efforts, to become independent of extraordinary outside economic assistance".

Reading right through the whole of this agreement, that note occurs time and again.

It is possible to take the aggressive attitude adopted by Deputy Cowan, but I am glad that I did not adopt it, even though I have been accused of going to the other end of the scale. Deputy Cowan says that he has somewhere or other learned that the economic administration in this country have decided in favour of agricultural production as against industrial production. I see no signs of that. It is quite true that those who pay attention to this country must recognise the position of agriculture, and there again, if there is to be an extended effort, it is only natural to expect that there will always be emphasis on the agricultural side. In one of the articles of this agreement under the heading of "General Undertakings", the Government of Ireland says that

"it will use its best endeavours to promote the development of industrial and agricultural production on a sound and economic basis".

I know very well that from time to time both in Paris and here a certain exhortation has been given to the people of this country with regard to how they may improve their dollar-earning capacity, and stress has not always been put on the agricultural side of production in that sense. I think Deputy Cowan can get it out of his head that there is any need for such suspicions as he seems to entertain. They are impudent really, and the atmosphere in which this Vote is being discussed shows that there is no necessity even to pay attention to such suspicions, but since they have been voiced, I took the opportunity to state what is known to me.

Deputy Cowan has stated that I spoke in an apologetic mood. I did not intend to, but there are differences in the tone one can use. There is the aggressive tone that can be adopted against people who make use of statements with which we do not agree. One can also be apologetic, and there are occasions when one has to be apologetic, but I did not think this was an occasion for that. I do not think that anybody connected with the economic administration in this country would expect people to come into this House in any abject or apologetic way, but there is a time when one feels bound to speak in terms of grateful recognition of a generous act. That is, where one recognises a very definite act of benevolence by people who need not have been benevolent at all, and one has to give some expression of view appreciating that. That is what I was aiming at when speaking here to-day, but I certainly did not intend to be apologetic. The American Government need not have advanced along the lines of the provision of Marshall Aid. If they did not, leaving out the long range view of what might happen five or six years or a decade hence, they could certainly have relieved their people of a tremendous burden of taxation which has been imposed on every American business-man, every private individual, every corporation in order to provide aid for Western Europe for a number of years and to provide it with amazing generosity. I think it is hardly the correct thing that when you receive a special benevolence in that way it should be greeted in the way in which it has been greeted by Deputy Cowan. He says he speaks with the approval of certain people. I have not met them among my acquaintances and I did not get any letters of that type. I did not see any instances of popular opinion, any strong backing for Deputy Cowan in what he has given expression to in this House. I am sorry he has not asked questions in this House indicating these suspicions as it would have given us an opportunity of clearing up any suspicions that may have existed in the minds of these people. I think the people as a whole properly appreciate just what is being done by the United States for Western Europe and this country.

The technical assistance aid is only a small part, but it is a very significant part of American aid to this country. It seems to me that the viewpoint of Deputy Cowan is completely out of accord with the viewpoint of the Americans in this respect. If they want to get a country like ours under some sort of economic domination, one of the best ways of achieving that object would be to keep the country under-developed and as ignorant as possible of the technical improvements along different lines made in America. So far from doing that, they have offered to receive people from this country with their own problems so that they may see how these problems are being dealt with in the United States, and come back here with a better appreciation of the solutions. They have also gone so far as to send over here people who are expert in certain matters in the United States so that they may see at close range here what are the difficulties inherent in certain phases of our life, and give us, on a near view, what they consider to be the appropriate way of getting over those difficulties. In no respect has there been anything but an altruistic approach by America in its relations with this country in all matters appertaining to Marshall Aid. If Deputy Cowan says there may be something more than mere altruism in building up a strong Western European economy, since Western Europe and this country are faced with the greatest menace the world has ever been faced with, there may be some germ of truth and reality in that. But the Americans are paying a great price to make Western Europe, and this country, strong enough to be independent, economically and nationally, so that these free and independent communities may come together to meet the power that menaces their independence both economically and nationally.

I would like to reiterate what I said in opening. I do not intend to be apologetic and I hope that nobody will read one word of apology into my words. I think we owe a great debt to America for all that she has done for Western Europe and for this country. I think we have been specially lucky in having a representative of the Economic Co-operation Administration group and particularly lucky in the people who came here with specialised expert knowledge of our conditions to see for themselves what our difficulties were so that they could freely assimilate what our problems were and aid us in the best possible way. That aid and assistance have been given to us most generously. I hope that my words will balance and at least weigh down what Deputy Cowan said in such grudging fashion about our accepting this aid.

Vote put and declared carried.

Captain Cowan

I dissent.

An Ceann Comhairle

Does the Deputy wish to be recorded as dissenting?

Captain Cowan

Yes.

Vote reported and agreed to.