The purpose of the introduction of this Bill is to continue the controls which were found necessary in regard to supplies, prices, imports and exports during the war period. Opposition Deputies have suggested that the Minister should at this stage have brought in permanent legislation to deal with these matters, but I think it is clear that, in view of the multiplicity of Orders dealing with prices, imports, exports and other restrictions which were found necessary during the emergency, it would be an impossibly difficult task to deal with them at present with fluctuations in prices and supplies as they are. The Minister's desire, and I am sure everybody will agree with it, is that permanent legislation should not be introduced until such time as there is at least foreseeable stability in relation to these matters. He has said on a number of occasions recently that such stability is approaching, and I think it has been fairly well established that, in respect of some commodities, stability has been reached and the diminution in the number of Orders under the provisions of this Act is an indication that some stability has been reached.
This Bill naturally gives an opportunity for the discussion of the cost of living. The Government when in opposition took advantage of it for that purpose and I do not think we have anything to apologise for in making our contributions at that time such as to bring the performance of the Government of the day in relation to their promises under survey. The point made in these debates two and three years ago was that, in relation to the promises made, the Government had failed miserably with regard to the cost of living and that is an assertion I am still prepared to make.
The members of the Government and the members of the Party have stated frequently that the cost of living is a matter over which no Government of its own volition has full control. International circumstances have more than a major part to play in the cost-of-living index figure in any country.
I heard Deputy Morrissey give expression to these sentiments on a public occasion shortly before he left office. Apparently he then realised, due to his experience in the Department of Industry and Commerce during the two and a half or three years in which he occupied the office of Minister there that, apart altogether from the controls and restrictions that he, as Minister, was able to effect there were international circumstances over which he had no control whatsoever. That is the position to-day.
I am not attempting to deny that the reduction in—not the withdrawal of— the food subsidies under the last Budget has had an effect on the cost of essential foodstuffs in the ordinary household and therefore on the cost of living not only to the housewife but to the community as a whole. It is worth while recording, however, that statistics show, and statistics are the only things which give us a reasonable guide to trends in commerce, trade, the cost of living and so forth, that in the last three or four months of the inter-Party Government's term of office the increase in the cost-of-living index figure was almost exactly the same as the increase in the cost-of-living index figure as a result of the reduction in food subsidies. That fact is recorded in our up-to-date statistics.
It must be assumed, therefore, that these essential commodities taken as a basis for computing the cost-of-living index figure increased in price as much during the last few months of the inter-Party Government's term of office as they did as a result of the reduction in food subsidies. That fact cannot be gainsaid.
The Opposition is quite entitled to take full advantage of every opportunity that Government policy or changes in Government policy offer in debate here and elsewhere. The trouble about that, however, is that they take too much advantage. When they get a platform as a result of Government policy they pound that platform until there is scarcely a single plank left beneath their own feet. The Opposition did that in relation to the Budget. To put it crudely, they flogged their advantage to death until not only they but the people outside got thoroughly fed up with it.
Everybody admits that the cost of living is now at a level at which nobody would desire to see it maintained. I would, however, like to demonstrate that we are in a relatively good position in comparison with the position in other countries. I think nobody in this enlightened age will even attempt to suggest that we can so isolate ourselves from or so insulate ourselves against world conditions as to keep our cost of living at a more attractive level than obtains elsewhere. Anybody who has travelled in recent years, and particularly within the last few months, must appreciate that the cost of living here is lower and the standard of living higher than that which obtains in most countries, if not in all European countries. Certainly our cost of living is lower than that in the United States of America or in Canada, though I agree that the level of wages is much higher in those countries in order to meet the phenomenally high cost of living.
It has been said by almost every speaker on the Opposition Benches that unemployment has increased considerably. Certainly the figures show that there has been some increase in the unemployment register. I do not think it is fair—and Deputy Morrissey must realise that it is not fair—to compare the figures in 1950 with the figures in the present year. Deputy McGilligan said last evening—Deputy Costello has said it frequently—that some time in 1950 the inter-Party Government called in the editorial representatives of the Press to explain to them certain aspects of Government policy, particularly in relation to some stockpiling the Government intended to do and to have done throughout the country.
As a result of that decision, which was conveyed only to the editorial representatives and to the manufacturers, it was obvious that there must be increased activity in manufactured goods here. The Government encouraged manufacturers and stockists of goods to get in as much material as they possibly could, in some cases a one year or two years supply. Most companies went abroad on receiving that advice and sought all the raw materials they could buy for their own particular industries. There was a stepping-up in the volume of activity in many of our factories and particularly in our manufacturing industries, such as textiles, boots and shoes and even motor-cars. As a result of increasing output to provide against harder times our industrial and commercial concerns were able to take on more workers but they knew, and the workers knew, that the period was an exceptional one, that they were providing against a possible increase in prices and against times when the goods in which they were interested might be in short supply on the world markets. More people were taken into industrial employment for a period during 1950 than would normally have been taken in.
It is, of course, obvious that having supplied the demands that would be made should a world shortage occur, our manufacturers and industrialists could not go any further than keep these supplies on hands. It was not suggested, nor was it expected, that they could or should at any stage maintain productivity at the same level in subsequent years. That is one of the important factors which has caused a certain reduction in the employment figures here in the last two years.
Deputies have painted a depressing picture of unemployment. We are at the moment passing through a slump in trade and industry but it is incorrect to relate that slump back to the reduction in food subsidies. I suggest to them that their memory is very short if they think that the slump has occurred only since the reduction in food subsidies. If there is a slump at the present time, I suggest the slump was much worse and inflicted far greater hardship in the months immediately after the change of Government rather than in the months immediately following the last Budget.
It all related back to the same point that, as a result of the stockpiling, shopkeepers had goods on hands— goods which were manufactured or made up when prices were at their peak. That is true, particularly, in relation to goods made of wool in its various stages of processing. Shopkeepers purchased wherever they could find goods for sale. They piled up their shelves with those goods. Factories manufactured far beyond current demands. They piled up whatever space they had to spare with those woollen goods which were made at a very high cost—possibly at the highest cost of woollen goods ever experienced in this country. Since then, there has been a reduction in the price of goods. It is only natural that shopkeepers and manufacturers found it difficult, in the months following that stockpiling, to distribute the goods they had piled up. That was one of the reasons for the slump—one of the worst slumps that has hit Irish trade and industry in recent years. I think that Deputy Morrissey—who, more than anybody else, was responsible for that advice which was given to traders and manufacturers—knows that quite well.
I believe that Deputy Morrissey tries to be fair to all sides. Like any other member of this House, however, when he is painting a picture Deputy Morrissey will, if it suits his book, try to leave out certain things which he considers are not necessary for the purpose of the picture which he is painting. I suggest that he ignored that fact this morning when he painted a very depressing picture of trade and industry in this country at the present time.
He did not say it directly but he implied that in every aspect of industry there is less employment now than there was 18 months ago. I will agree with him that in the first few months of this Government's office there was less employment than there was during the latter few months of the Coalition Government's régime. I cannot agree with him that that applies at the present time in every branch of industry. Following the trade recession in the woollen industry, the remedial measures taken by the present Minister for Industry and Commerce have begun to show effect. In many of our textile factories throughout the country, if not in all of them, work has been restored to full capacity output. I know of factories in my constituency where unemployment was rife in the early months of the present Government's terms of office but where they are now working three shifts a day. That is something which they thought, when the change of Government took place, would have been impossible in such a short time.
There is a slump in the motor industry. That is something which I and my colleagues who represent Cork City deprecate more than anybody else. I am not going to make any attempt to minimise the effect of that slump on employment, not only in Cork but throughout the country. Again, we cannot ignore international trends. It must be realised that in Britain the motor-car industry, despite all their insistence on exports, is having a very lean time at present. That in its turn, affects this country. There may be other factors—I am sure there are. The alteration in the road tax cannot be held responsible for the slump, because, in the case of many categories of cars, the alteration in the road tax will mean a decrease in the amount of money that will have to be paid by their owners. As well as that, there is the reduction, that will come into operation shortly, in the amount of insurance to be paid. There is a decrease in the output of many of the makes of cars for which there is to be a decrease in the amount payable. Therefore, it is not fair or right to suggest that any slump which is being experienced at present in the motor manufacturing or motor assembling industry in this country is due to the alteration in the road tax.
It is a peculiar fact that while work is decreasing and while the employment content of Ford's factory in Cork is decreasing, the neighbouring factory— Dunlops—is producing tyres and rubber goods almost to maximum capacity: I use the word "almost" because I am not certain that they are producing at the maximum capacity. I know that many of the workers whom Dunlops were obliged to leave off some months ago have been taken on again. Therefore, that represents to me a somewhat contradictory picture. At all events, I think it indicates that if people are not buying the motor-cars at the present time they are doing as much motoring as they did formerly. Taking one year with another, I think it is well established that the months immediately prior to Christmas are the months when the motoring manufacturing industry, and kindred industries, are at their lowest ebb.
Deputy Norton referred to the fact that there is reduced employment in very many branches of industry throughout the country. He admitted that some of these reductions are seasonal. He instanced the 500, or so, who are disemployed in the hotel and catering industries. That is usual at this time of the year. He also made a lot of the fact that there is less employment at the docks now than there was formerly. As leader of a trade union and as a person in close touch with trade union affairs, I think Deputy Norton must know that there are other factors which are causing this disemployment. I take it that if in a trade union it is found that some members are rendered unemployed, the union will investigate all the factors that go to bring about that reduction in employment. I am sure that if Deputy Norton has not found the reason, it must have been conveyed to some of his colleagues that shipping all over the world has reduced considerably. There are shipping companies who are operating at the present time on about one-third of their normal tonnage. They are now able to manage what trade they do with this country and with other international ports with one ship whereas formerly they used three ships. That is another factor for which no government can be held to be entirely responsible. Why, may we ask, is shipping at such a stage at the present time? I think that one of the reasons is that, due to imminence of war or to the fear of imminence of war, every country is trying its best to make itself as self-sufficient as possible.
In order to redress its balance of payments, every country throughout the world, including our own and Great Britain, is doing its utmost to reduce imports. A reduction of imports necessarily means a reduction of exports——