Vol. 136 No. 15
I move:—
That as regards any Act of the present Session to amend and extend the National Stud Act, 1945, it is expedient to authorise any advances from or Charges on the Central Fund or the growing produce thereof that may be necessary to carry such Act into effect.
On the Money Resolution I should like to say that, while itis the responsibility of the board of the National Stud to run the stud under the Statute, the Minister did indicate that consideration had been given to the need for further capital before this proposed purchase was contemplated. That may or may not be accepted. It is significant, however, that no proposal was brought forward here. I think the Minister should indicate to the board of the stud that as far as possible they should endeavour in the immediate future to provide out of their own resources whatever capital is required by running the stud at a profit.
The other suggestion on the matter which I should like to make is that the acquisition of this particular animal and the acquisition of two other sires already, Royal Charger and Preciptic, was an effort to provide a particular type of high class bloodstock which the country requires and for which probably the resources of many individual breeders would not allow them to compete. It is not in the interests of the industry generally that the stud should provide sires of which there is an abundance in the country. That may be a detail which it is better to leave to the board of the stud. On the other hand, where public money is being voted we should endeavour, first of all, to get the best return possible, and, secondly, to cater for the type of bloodstock that only some of the private studs or individual breeders are in a position to buy. I think the stud should not provide sires or bloodstock which a great number of persons in this country are already able to provide or have available for the use of breeders.
The Labour Party have already made their position on this Bill very plain and propose to do so on every stage. Our objection to this purchase at this time, as I indicated before, is based upon our conviction that the Government have lost all sense of proportion in relation to expenditure and to the importance of things. Our objection is given even more weight and point by the announcement to-day of the unemployment figures. Unemployment has increased by 1,000 persons since we were discussing this matter last week. The published figures for the week ending 28thFebruary are 89,579. Any Deputy who has been in contact with his constituents, regardless of what their affiliations are, will agree that the country is receiving this step with absolute disgust. The majority of the people feel that it is just one further example of the loss of contact with the ordinary people which has been displayed by this Government on so many occasions.
On the Second Reading we discussed very fully the views of this Party. We made them perfectly clear despite the fact that the Minister tried to shroud the real purpose of this Bill and to conceal, though his effort was futile, that the real purpose of the Bill was to enable the Government in effect to purchase the racehorse, Tulyar. He endeavoured to conceal that purpose by trying to limit the discussion on the Bill to the extension of the actual capital of the National Stud.
It would be well for the Government now to admit frankly that this extension of capital is required for one purpose only, to buy a racehorse from the Aga Khan. We have made our position in this matter very clear. I do not think it needs any reiteration. It is a simple choice between the people and a racehorse. Should we take a gamble with £250,000 of the taxpayers' money on a racehorse, which may be good or which may be bad? Should we take that step or should we invest that £250,000 for the purpose of improving the living standards of the people or providing work for them?
Anybody who is in touch with the people and who knows the difficulties under which they are living, the hardships they are enduring, the increased cost of living and the difficulty of procuring employment, is inundated with letters and requests from people who cannot get work anywhere at anything. Every Deputy must have had that experience. Every Deputy who has had that experience can only view this step by the present Government as completely unjustified and one which cannot be supported. In making its attitude clear on this matter, the Labour Party is expressing the feelings of the majority of our people,and we do not propose to support this step.
I have already made my views clear on this matter. Like Deputy Dunne, I feel that we must oppose this Bill.
We are only discussing the Money Resolution at the moment.
We must oppose the Money Resolution. It is sheer madness for us to expend such a sum of money on such a purpose at this juncture. I put down a question to-day to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance asking him to provide facilities for people on their way to Mass, people who have to wade knee-deep in water in order to reach the church.
We cannot discuss every problem by contrast against the proposed expenditure of £250,000. If that were permitted we would be into Government policy and the question before us is whether this expenditure is justified, and that is all.
I submit it is fantastic to spend this sum on the purchase of a racehorse while at the same time expecting human beings to wade kneedeep in water on their way to Mass. I think the principle underlying this is entirely wrong. I have already made my attitude clear on this matter.
This step has been discussed at length and there is perhaps no advantage in delaying business at this stage. On the one hand, we are thinking of spending £250,000 on a racehorse and, on the other hand, we know of many things on which this money could be expended to better advantage for the people as a whole. The Minister must realise the numbers signing on at the unemployment exchanges all over the country. It is all very well to talk about planning for the future. We know that in other countries they have had five-year plans. A five-year plan is of very little advantage to the people who are crying out for work to-day.
Here we have a responsible Minister,a member of a responsible Government, asking for the provision of £250,000 in order to buy a racehorse while in the labour exchanges in Cork City and throughout the entire Twenty-Six Counties——
The Deputy is now endeavouring to discuss unemployment and that is quite irrelevant. The whole ambit of Government policy might be discussed by contrast if that method were adopted and that cannot be permitted.
Apparently we are in a position to spend £250,000 on a racehorse at a time when essential commodities are increasing in price every day. If we have £250,000 to spend the question arises as to whether it is advisable to spend that money in the way suggested on something which may be advantageous in the very distant future. If all were well with the country this expenditure might be justified, but surely the Minister will not go so far as to say that we can afford to spend at this juncture £250,000 on a horse no matter how great that horse is or how rosy we may paint the future when we have so many unemployed and when we are paying 4d. per lb. more for butter. Let us have some common sense about this matter. We have not got the money to spend on such a luxury at the present time.
We have made our position clear on the Second Reading of the Bill, and at this stage I merely want to appeal to the Minister to reconsider the whole matter. Is it wise in the present state of things, remembering the public outcry against this particular step on the part of the Government, to ask the House for £250,000 to purchase a racehorse? I think it is an outrageous proposal.
As has been said by some of the previous speakers, this is a gamble with £250,000 of the taxpayers' money. The horse has been described as the world's best. On the other hand, we do not know; he may be a complete dud. I do not think he is a dud but the Minister should not take this step when everybody in the country, regardlessof politics, is asking himself at the present time: how is it that the Government can calmly propose the expenditure of this sum for this particular purpose whereas when they are asked to provide money for other purposes they say that they have none? We hear of nothing but the appalling Book of Estimates, that no revenue is coming into the Exchequer, and that the country is bankrupt. Every possible gloomy forecast that can be made is being made while at the same time we seem to have an endless supply of money for any foolish scheme.
Has the Minister satisfied himself why one of the richest men in the world to-day is parting with this horse? It cannot be said that he is selling the horse because he is short of money. It has become a national joke up and down the country that this State which, a few years ago, accepted aid from the United States and was glad to get it— and all sides of the House expressed that opinion—is now in the happy position that it can bid against the richest States in the world for this horse. Personally I think it is a daft move and I do not believe the Government is wise in outraging public opinion as it is doing by proposing this expenditure.
It is only last Saturday night we had the announcement that butter was up by 4d. a lb. That may seem of very little consequence to the Government but it has hit every home in the country. A few days before that announcement was made we had this proposal to spend £250,000 on a racehorse. Actions like that are bringing this House into disrepute. It is openly asking the people of this country to disregard the laws this House makes. We make laws governing every aspect of the life of the people in this country, some for their protection and some for their benefit, and some in regard to our relations with other countries. We ask the people to have respect for these laws, but the people can have respect for the laws only if we ourselves show a little common sense in carrying out the duties that are placed on us. Asking this House to expend this sum of money for thisparticular purpose will have very far-reaching effects.
What is the particular purpose?
To buy a racehorse.
That is wrong.
The Minister wants to try to trip up Deputies on just a technical point.
Be honest with the House and tell us what is the purpose of this proposed expenditure.
It is all the same where the money is spent and what purpose it is for; the taxpayers will be carrying the burden.
Imagine the Deputy being leader of a Farmers' Party.
Did he not object to the price of butter and the price of milk?
When did I say that?
The price of milk does not arise on this.
I mentioned the price of butter and I repeat what I said.
It is equally irrelevant.
You object to the farmers receiving a higher price for butter?
This Money Resolution is asking this House for £250,000 for a specific purpose.
Surely it is not in order for the deputy leader of the Farmers' Party to object to an increase in the price of milk?
A leader has no more responsibility than an ordinary Deputy.
Even though he is doing it by a side wind.
If Deputy Cowan keeps on the way he is going, it will be along time before he is leader of anything. He is not even leader of his own person.
Let us return to the Money Resolution.
I am following myself even if I am not leading anybody.
I did not discuss the price of butter. Up and down the country people have to pay these increased prices——
You are repeating the irrelevancies.
I am not. The Government is most unwise in persisting in this proposal. It would have much more far-reaching effects if that horse died than if that £250,000 went into a boghole.
The Deputy would make a great splash if he went into a boghole.
If Deputy Cowan would stop his noise, other Deputies might be able to say what they wish to say on this question. No matter how sore Deputy Cowan feels about backing a Government in open defiance of his own election promises, he will not stop me from saying what I want to say on this.
That has nothing to do with the Resolution.
Fianna Fáil Deputies think this is a huge joke. It may be great fun to Deputy Briscoe, Deputy Cowan and others——
You are the fun.
——but I am thinking of people who find it hard to make ends meet and who cannot understand the Government calmly proposing to obtain this sum of money from the House. I want to condemn the proposal in the strongest possible manner.
You are objecting to a proposal to build up the National Stud.
How does the Ministerknow? I told the Minister what I am objecting to.
To giving money for the development of the National Stud.
You are building up the National Stud for the benefit of 20 or 30 racing people in this country.
The Government is building up the Aga Khan.
If the Minister is going to build up the National Stud in the same way as he has destroyed the dairying industry, it is a poor hope. He has made a very bad job of things so far and if this is his contribution to building up the National Stud, I say goodness help the National Stud.
This is a very unwise action on the part of the Government at this particular time. There may come a time when we can afford it, when it might not be such an outrage on public opinion as it is now. This is not the time to do it and in all sincerity I would ask the Minister to reconsider the whole matter.
I would like to add my voice to those already raised in protest against this expenditure. In the course of his remarks the Minister has stated that this money which the House is about to provide is to build up the National Stud. Deputy Dunne has very rightly stated that it is to build up the Aga Khan and people of that type. I wish to have it placed on the records of this House that I oppose very strongly, and I dissociate myself in the strongest possible way from, this expenditure.
On this Money Resolution I would ask the Minister if there is any foundation for the rumour, which has become widespread in recent weeks, that in addition to the purchase of Tulyar for £250,000, the Government are now considering the purchase of two other horses?
The Government did not consider the purchase of Tulyar. Get that out of your mind, if you have one.
The Government is providing the money for the people who did consider it. I want the Ministerto state clearly now whether the authorities responsible for purchasing Tulyar are now considering the purchase of two other animals for which this House will be asked to foot the bill. It would be quite different if these purchases took place in the days of the inter-Party Government when we had a cost of living which was much lower than the present figure and when the number of unemployed was the lowest ever recorded.
The Deputy will not get away with references to the cost of living on this Money Resolution.
I consider it a waste of public money. I want to say that this horse will not thrive, after all the curses the unemployed people of the country have put upon it. I join with Deputy Blowick in asking that the Government should consider this question very seriously and should tell the people who have considered this purchase that the time is inopportune to embark upon expenditure of this character and that the Government have more pressing problems facing them—unemployment, the cost of living and the health of our people generally.
The Deputy must cease discussing other matters in contrast to the question before the House. I have already warned him.
I should like the Minister to inform these people who have made this recommendation to the Government and who have applied for this fabulous sum of money that it is not the intention of the Government to proceed with the transaction in view of the other pressing problems confronting them. Whether the purchase of the animal is good or bad is another day's work. What we must consider it that we are spending the taxpayers' money. This House has been asked to vote this sum to build up the National Stud. The National Stud is of very little use to the unemployed, to the thousands who cannot get work or to the harassed taxpayer. The National Stud is of very little use to small farmers throughout thecountry. I protest in the strongest possible manner against this expenditure.
I have already warned the Deputy that he must keep to the terms of the Money Resolution.
I have made my protest and it is on record.
I listened with great interest to the approach of certain Deputies to this matter when the Second Reading of the Bill was discussed. We are now having an attempt to repeat the Second Reading debate, with a number of additions on the Money Resolution. One would imagine from those who have spoken from the opposite benches that Fine Gael were acting as a Party in this matter, as Labour is, but there are divided counsels on the Fine Gael Benches. There are a number of the Fine Gael Party who are in favour of additional funds being provided for the National Stud.
The difference is that we are not "yes" men. Each Deputy in this Party can speak his own mind.
They are in favour of developing the National Stud in the interests of horse-breeding generally in the country. I am amazed that at this hour of the day anybody would suggest in this House that the horse-breeding industry is not of paramount importance to this country and that it does not give employment. The Minister, on Second Reading, indicated the value of the industry to the farmers and to the nation. He pointed out the employment it provided in the growing of food for these valuable horses, the employment which the stud farm gives and the value derived from the export of live stock, in many instances for hard currency. A great deal has been said about the individual from whom this horse was purchased. I think that is most unfair. If the directors of the National Stud think the purchase of this horse is a good investment for them, it does not matter to us from whom they buy it, and I think it is most unfair to makesuch criticisms as were made of the individuals who were sufficiently fortunate to be able to breed a horse of the value that this horse possesses.
The question we have to consider is that the National Stud was set up by the Government. The directors manage a valuable piece of property and have a number of valuable animals. They have given valuable service since this stud was established, and they have now reached a stage where they require increased capital to give increased value to the nation, over and above that which has already been given. Deputy Blowick spoke about the 4d. per lb. increase in butter.
And I told him that it was irrelevant.
Yes, Sir, but to the extent that it was an irrelevancy, the farmers will benefit to the extent of £1,700,000.
That is equally irrelevant on this occassion.
There is just that important point.
A great many things are important but are not relevant.
Deputy Flanagan and Deputy Dunne have told us that there has been the most terrific outcry from all over the country against this transaction on the part of the National Stud. Those of use who support the proposal to provide additional capital for the National Stud have not received any indication that that feeling is abroad at all. I have not received a single letter from anybody protesting against the provision of additional capital for the National Stud. The main purpose of this additional capital is to provide money for the purchase of this valuable animal but I want to say that there is no evidence of an outcry such as has been described. I think the intervention of Deputy Flanagan is amazing. He says that the curses of the unemployed will bring bad luck to this animal. I think such conduct is foreign to the nature of our people. I think the unemployed are just asanxious as the employed to see this country prosper and I do not believe that Deputy Flanagan's statement is true. It is typical of the statements that we hear from the Deputy from time to time. Deputies who are opposed to this Resolution should consider the question in a calm and deliberate way. Is the National Stud under the control of directors who can be trusted with additional capital or is it not? If it is, they should be given all necessary support and if it is not, the whole place should be closed down or the directors should be changed. Nobody has found fault with the management of the National Stud. Not a single instance can be adduced here to show that they have had, at any time or in any way, mismanaged in the slightest any of their operations. I happen to know—and it is not a rumour—that they bought an animal for a sum of £12,000 and they could sell that animal to-morrow for £120,000. That is the sire, Royal Charger.
The purchase price was £52,000
The purchase price was £52,000 and as I say he could be sold to-morrow for more than double that figure.
If he could be sold——
Deputy Flanagan will keep his mouth shut while I am speaking. I shall not give way to him. I want to point out that that is good management, that they had the wisdom to pay £52,000, which undoubtedly was a large amount of money, for an animal which has proved itself a success and now, notwithstanding its increased age, they could sell it for £120,000. That is good management.
I do not believe a word of it.
Deputy Flanagan is such an apt person to make statements which are untrue and without foundation that he knows he cannot believe himself and now he is beginning to disbelieve others. It is only a person who deliberately states thingswhich he knows to be true who will believe those things which are said by others. When you do not speak the truth yourself you will not believe others.
I have discussed this matter with a great number of people. It has been given very wide publicity. The sooner we finish deliberating on this matter, pass the Money Resolution and the Bill in its final stages, the more good we will do. A number of people who spoke this evening also spoke on the Second Reading. I have yet to hear a single criticism of the acts in the past of those who were responsible for operating the National Stud. Nobody said that it has not done a good job since its inception. Nobody wants it shut down.
Deputy Blowick wants to back it each way. He wants to be right if it should be a misfortune and he wants to be right if there is not. He says that he does not know whether the horse which is to be purchased out of portion of this money will be any good or not. He hopes it will be. I do not understand that approach. If I opposed it I would oppose it on the principles as I saw them and I would not try to hang my hat on two different pegs at the same time.
It appears to me that when Deputy Dunne first took up this matter he thought it would be exceptionally good politics to agitate against this purchase on the ground that it was extravagant, wild, stupid expenditure. He thought he could relate it to the misery of some of our people who are unfortunate enough to be in certain circumstances. I do not think that Deputy Dunne could show to this House any volume of telegrams or correspondence congratulating him on his stand.
Did you ever read the Evening Mail?
I read the Evening Mailvery often. Next Wednesday, when a question of mine will be raised in the House, I hope Deputy Dunne will get up and stand four-square for theEvening Mailfor their slanderousattack in an editorial on a patriot and hero of this nation.
Do not try to twist the matter.
The Evening Mailis a good type of paper.
I am asking Deputy Dunne to show the House the slightest shred of evidence that his agitation has been accepted or followed by any of the people he has attempted to mislead in this matter.
The usual dirty Briscoe tricks.
Deputy Dunne should control himself and allow Deputy Briscoe to proceed.
Deputies in this House have tried to suggest that there has been an almost universal outcry against the purchase of this animal and the granting of any additional funds to the National Stud, but nobody has produced a single shred of evidence to that effect, and then it is suggested that these are dirty Briscoe tricks——
That is what they are.
——when Deputy Dunne is exposed to the House for what he is.
You exposed yourself often enough. You are well exposed to the people of this country.
The Deputy should allow Deputy Briscoe to proceed.
If I am going to be provoked I will reply.
Deputy Briscoe has a better record than you.
The quicker those with records are gone the better. A couple of more years will finish all the records.
If the Deputy cannot control himself I will ask him to leave the House.
The observations of Deputy Flanagan may not, I respectfullysuggest, be permitted to remain— that a few years will see the end of people with records in this country.
Stop play-acting.
It is an insult to the people who fought for this country, and it ought not be permitted in this Parliament. I ask you, Leas-Cheann Comhairle, to request or require Deputy Flanagan to withdraw that offensive observation which is an offence not only to people living but to people who are dead.
Deputy Flanagan made no reference to any particular Deputy.
He referred to patriots.
We cannot have a discussion on that at this stage.
People with records are not necessarily patriots.
I am asking you, Sir, to require Deputy Flanagan to withdraw that observation.
The Chair has given a ruling. The Deputy should go back and mobilise his private army.
I am approaching this matter from the point of view of the responsibility which faces every Deputy in this House.
A member of Fine Gael.
And an ex-member of both political Parties.
And an ex-member of the Dáil after the next election.
I do not know why there should be so much excitement. Is it permissible for some people to walk on the toes of others and not permissible for those whose toes have been trod upon to do likewise? It is all very well to hit me when I have my hands down and not when they are up. Deputies opposite keep them upall the time. I approached this problem as a responsible member of the House should. We have an institution which is a business-like institution. Never once in this House in all the years since its establishment has any single action of that institution been questioned or condemned or criticised but when the time comes for a great development to take place which will produce good results for the country as a whole the opportunity is utilised for the purpose of attacking the Government as if the Government were taking £250,000 and throwing it down the drain.
I am speaking with a full sense of the responsibility that I should take on here vis-á-vis my constituents. I represent a working class constituency mainly. I am quite satisfied that my constituents would be quite in favour of the line I have taken in this matter. I am not appealing to the lowest motives in people. I am judging the matter in the manner in which we should judge matters connected with national affairs.
I believe this is a good move. I hope that whatever purchases the National Stud make will be crowned with success. I hope this sire will prove itself to be a great success and bring credit, prestige and additional funds to our country. There were divided counsels among those who opposed the measure.
I wonder why the Leader of the Labour Party has not spoken on this industry. He represents a constituency mainly concerned with this industry but why does he not come in and tell us his view on the matter? Deputy Dunne has several times said that he was speaking on behalf of the Labour Party. I take it that Deputy Norton, as the leader of that Party, is au faitand in accord with that Labour Party decision. I could quite understand a democratic Party making a decision by a majority. It is quite possible that Deputy Norton may not have been in agreement with it, but democratically he must abide by the majority rule. I would like to hear him here, one way or another, and would like to see him come in and vote.
My own colleague from the constituencyI represent, Deputy MacBride, did not make up his mind on the last occasion, I think.
He did.
I spoke on it and voted on it.
He voted with the extraordinary collection.
The extraordinary collection went the other way.
I do not think he has made up his mind yet. I do not think he is quite satisfied that it is wrong to give the National Stud the additional funds.
Bulls were what Deputy MacBride wanted.
He said he did not know. He said he would support it if we gave an equal amount for the purchase of bulls—not knowing that all the money required for the purchase of bulls is always available. Now that he has been told—and I am sure the Minister will confirm it, as a responsible Minister—that all the bulls necessary for our cattle requirements can be obtained at any time, that there is no question of a money hold-up in it, now that he is assured of that, will he act up to what he said and vote for the Money Resolution?
I think it is proper to reiterate on this Money Resolution our opposition to the proposal to raise this money. It is not necessary to discuss whether the purchase of Tulyar is a good investment or a bad investment. As I said on the Second Reading, I am prepared to accept the judgment of those in charge of the National Stud that this is a sound investment, but where I oppose the proposal to raise £250,000 by taxation from the people is that it is not the proper way to finance this investment.
It is not by taxation.
It will eventually be by taxation. Deputy Briscoe said we all should like to see the countryprosper. Of course we would: that is why we on this side continue in politics —to get the present Government out.
And it will prosper then?
It will, undoubtedly, as soon as you are gone out. There is no question about that at all.
We had experience of the prosperity while you were here.
We gave three years of the greatest prosperity we ever had.
We will be paying for it for the next 50 years.
It is wrong to have Deputies like Deputy Briscoe fooling themselves by a sort of pipe dream, believing that the purchase of Tulyar will add one halfpenny to the general welfare or prosperity of this country. It will not. It will benefit one small section of the community, those who engage in the bloodstock industry, those who are in that industry because they already have the necessary capital and means to own and breed racehorses. I do not grudge them the benefit they are entitled to expect from the purchase of Tulyar or from the enhanced price of the progeny that will be raised in the next two or three years; but I do question why I and Deputy Briscoe and Deputy Cowan should be asked to put money into the pockets of this particular section.
We should not have the National Stud at all, at that rate.
Let us have the stud.
We cannot.
I do not query that at all, but I do query very definitely why the general body of our citizens should be asked to make an investment of a substantial kind for one small section. We cannot cod ourselves, as Deputy Briscoe seems to have done, into a belief that the bloodstock industry is one of our major industries. It is not: it is a very secondary part of agriculture and always will be, unless Deputies like Deputies Briscoeand Cowan want this country to become again the ranch of the world.
You do not find ranches in studs.
If Deputy Briscoe were to have his way, this country would be a racing ground for the Tulyars of the world.
Only one Tulyar at a time.
It shows what he knows about it.
We are making a substantial capital investment for a secondary branch of our agricultural industry. We are doing that, I am afraid, without any real effort to defend the investment. The case for the purchase of Tulyar has been based on the fact that this sire is the best horse in the world. He well may be, but that is not the way in which we should approach this. We should rather be concerned to see where the national return will be, what will be the effect on employment, how it will improve the condition of the working people. If there is a return in that respect, this purchase can be defended.
Do you doubt that?
If there is not, then the investment from the general revenue pool cannot be defended.
Is it out of the revenue pool?
It will come eventually out of it.
It is a capital investment.
A capital investment? You just do not pull money from the clouds. The Aga Khan will not take just a book entry. He will want £. s. d. and it will have to come from somewhere. I have given considerable thought to this matter and I cannot see any possible return in employment or matters of that kind. I can see that ten, 20 or 30 people will benefit considerably.
The Deputy is thinking on the wrong lines.
That may be so. All of us think occasionally on the wrong lines. I suggest to the Minister to let the National Stud buy Tulyar if it wants to, but let him not come into the House with a Money Resolution for the purpose. I make the suggestion to him that I made on Second Reading: let him go back to the bloodstock breeders of the country, the men who are going to make the money, and ask them to pool £250,000. He would get it overnight. If this sire is the wonderful sire Deputy Briscoe believes him to be— and apparently is—could there be any doubt that the bloodstock breeders, now that the National Stud has collared Tulyar, would be only too glad to make the necessary investment to retain him here? The Minister would be doing a far better day's work for the industry and for the country if he made some effort to organise the industry along lines on which it could finance its own investments.
It is an unhealthy thing, whatever case may be made for it, to have this kind of luxury investment from the point of view of the ordinary man in the street taking place at a time of general national restriction. If it could be done otherwise, as I have no doubt it could be, it is a far sounder thing to get the industry itself to pay its way. It has been done with any number of other industries here already and I do not think it would be impossible for the Minister to make that attempt. I know that the view I am expressing is a view that is held pretty generally throughout the House and outside, and I certainly think that at least some effort should have been made along those lines.
Deputy Briscoe said—I wonder if he was, in effect, whistling to keep up his courage—that no one wrote to him protesting against the purchase of Tulyar and that he had seen no evidence of public resentment or criticism. If the Deputy thinks that, I envy him his imagination, because I cannot think of any single action of a Government in the past five years that has aroused more widespread resentmentand criticism than this particular investment.
Where did the Deputy meet that?
I have met it everywhere.
Give us an instance.
I should like to bring into the House the thousands of people who do feel very deeply a sense of resentment against this proposal.
The Deputy has a wonderful imagination.
Deputies on the opposite side apparently have an amazing ability to cod themselves. I believe that some Deputies over there still think that the Fianna Fáil Government has support in the country, and that is a broadness of imagination which is certainly unique and special to the Fianna Fáil Party.
We are quite certain of it.
But you will not try it out.
There is a very easy way of testing it.
Put up any horse you like against Tulyar.
You will get a result in Wicklow.
Deputy O'Higgins might be allowed to make his speech.
We tested it out some years ago and you got your answer.
If these conversations would cease, we could hear Deputy O'Higgins.
It is always very interesting to hear the blustering talk that one occasionally hears from Government Ministers about an election, but they never have it. They are always very careful not to have it.
We had some imagination last summer.
We cannot discuss it on this Money Resolution.
I am an individual Deputy and I represent two counties. I travel my constituency very regularly and I should like to give this body of evidence to the Minister and Deputy Briscoe, that it is my experience that there is general and widespread resentment against this proposal—not, may I hasten to add, that anyone really doubts that the purchase of Tulyar by the National Stud is probably a sound investment. What the people object to is the call on the general pool to finance the proposal. I suggest to the Minister that there should be other ways of doing it. A sum of £250,000 is not chicken-feed. My imagination is sufficiently flexible to imagine other purpose to which that sum could be put. It is not proper to discuss them here, but I want to repeat the objection I made on Second Reading with regard to this proposal. I think it has been a very unfortunate business and a very unfortunate proposal at a time like this.
It is correct, as Deputy Briscoe said, that the Fine Gael Party has divided views with regard to this matter. There is no question of concealment in that regard, but, unlike the Fianna Fáil Party, the Fine Gael Party is a democratic political Party, and on matters of this kind we express our own views.
Which side of Fine Gael is right on this point?
I know that there are unfortunate Deputies behind the Minister who would dearly like to be voicing the objection I am voicing now. I have no doubt that Deputy McGrath from Cork has had his ears boxed because of the purchase of Tulyar.
Ask Deputy Collins about it.
I have no doubt that other Deputies behind the Minister have had to meet considerable constituency objection to this proposal.
I did not even hear the name mentioned in Cork.
For Deputy Cowan, I can hold out no hope. He will always trundle in behind the big force in order to keep his seat in this House, so long as it may last.
You are worried about them all.
Deputy McGrath should cease interrupting.
I notice that every time Tulyar is before the House, Deputy McGrath is in. I think that at a time like this and in the manner in which it is presented, this Money Resolution should not be passed and I hope a majority of the House will refuse to pass the Money Resolution to give the Minister this sum to be spent in the manner he proposes.
There is a good deal of enjoyment to be got out of this debate. I came in when Deputy Blowick was talking, and, for some reason or other, my imagination visualised Wardle's fat boy who went to sleep at every available opportunity. The only difference between himself and Deputy Blowick was that Deputy Blowick's sleep seemed to be of the mental rather than the physical kind.
The House is not discussing Deputy Blowick.
It is very strange how this developed. We had the announcement that the National Stud were to buy Tulyar. Apparently some English people did not like the idea of a little country like Ireland—"It is one of the old colonies, you know"— buying a magnificent horse of this kind.
We bred it.
Yes, but they were surprised that we should buy it for our National Stud.
I am surprised that the Deputy would take any notice of those people.
They did not think it was all right. They started acampaign against it. They induced some Deputies of this House to make a campaign of it.
Is the Deputy saying that no English people are attached to the National Stud? Have a look at their pictures and their names.
Unfortunately, some Deputies were misled by this anti-Irish propoganda. They thought it would be a good idea to cash in on it.
Wrap the green flag round Tulyar.
It is even suggested that some of those people who make their living in Ireland by writing nastily about Ireland prepared some of the speeches that were delivered against the purchase of Tulyar. We have to face that.
On a point of order. I want to make this clear. I do not propose to let Deputy Cowan's remark pass. I want to know, on a point of order, whether a suggestion has been made by Deputy Cowan that any person, whether a hack journalist or anybody else, wrote a speech for me. I want to know that from Deputy Cowan. The suggestion was there. I make my own speeches and nobody inside or outside this House writes them for me—as is the case with some Deputies in this House. They are given their script when they come in.
Deputy Cowan's statement was a general statement. It did not identify any Deputy.
Let us have the matter cleared, anyway.
We must be on our guard against that sort of thing. It is very wrong that this malicious conspiracy should be continued against this country—even with the assistance of a fifth column within the country.
Are you referring now to your own army?
That is a sore point.
Or maybe the Ministerfor Finance is in it now. I hear he got a commission.
Perhaps the House would allow Deputy Cowan to make his speech.
Deputy Cowan was sacked from the Army.
I should like to add to the statement by Deputy O'Higgins that Deputy Major de Valera and myself were both removed from the Reserve at the same time and for the same reason.
So was I.
And Deputy Collins too.
But you were not given such quick promotion.
I think it is necessary to correct that type of suggestion by Deputy O'Higgins.
I felt that the Deputy was badly treated.
The three of us fought for a particular principle and the Minister acted against the three of us in the same way.
We cannot have any discussion on extraneous matters. The Deputy must come to the Money Resolution. If Deputy Cowan is not interested in pursuing the discussion——
I am interested, but I just want the House to be a little quiet. I think that there is a considerable amount of confusion in regard to this very simple matter. The National Stud is an organisation established by statute. Its capital was set up by a statute passed by the Oireachtas—just like the News Agency. It was found that the capital of the company was not sufficient. This Bill is nothing more or less than a Bill to increase the capital of the company to £500,000. Obviously, the purpose of that is to enable the National Stud to complete the purchase of Tulyar.
The Minister does not say that.
As far as the House is concerned, the purpose of this Bill is to increase the capital to £500,000.
There was not the same fuss about the first £250,000 to set it up.
If, when the company was being set up, £500,000 was considered necessary, it would have been provided. The value of money has altered considerably. The purchase of Tulyar may be one of the greatest things that ever occurred in this country. Anybody who knows anything about bloodstock knows that one particular Arab stallion is, in fact, responsible for the greatest bloodstock strains in Europe.
Nat Gould says that. That is nonsense.
I am just making the point that it is very easy to trace back all the bloodstock——
Most of the classic breed is not Arab.
We may be doing something now which will have wonderful consequences for this country. As I said on the Second Reading, if this matter were approached by people with big minds there would be no trouble about it.
And some knowledge of the subject.
Unfortunately, minds appear to be in inverse order to bodies, so far as this debate is concerned.
To corporations, do you mean?
Deputy Cowan must not attack himself.
Some Deputies have displayed a very small mentality on this matter. I looked at the Deputies who marched into the lobby to vote against the Second Reading of this Bill——
They were a motley crowd.
——every one of them with only one idea—"How will I be able to get a few votes out of Tulyar?" I would not mind some Deputies going into that Lobby and voting against the purchase of Tulyar but I was more than surprised to see our ex-Minister for External Affairs amongst them because I am quite satisfied that if he were still a Minister and were still travelling around the world he would be boosting the tremendous achievement of the purchase of Tulyar. However, people come down from time to time.
And go up again.
We heard a Deputy get up and say that if all the curses the unemployed have cursed fall on Tulyar he will not live long. A Deputy on that side of the House said that. That is an atheistical concept. It is only an atheistical mind that would think of that. It is a slander and reflection on the people of this country, whether they are employed or unemployed. There is a suggestion that the unemployed are of the same atheistical mentality as the Deputy who said that.
On a point of Order. Deputy Cowan has cast a serious reflection, whether he intended it or not, on a member of the House. I do not think that the matter should be let rest at that.
That is no point of order.
I am raising it as a point of order.
Is the Deputy entitled to call a member of this House an atheist, the Deputy who once asked the permission of the Chair to call the Minister for Finance a sewer rat?
I have raised a point of order. The Deputy has said that a Deputy of this House is an atheist. I think that is a most serious charge, and it should be withdrawn.
The Chair did not understand Deputy Cowan to make such a charge. Hewas referring to a speech made by a Deputy. He was entitled to refer to the speech, but so far as the Chair is aware he made no such charge as the Deputy suggests.
I hope that, when Deputy O'Higgins becomes a judge, he will not decide his cases on that line of approach.
Perhaps Deputy Cowan would now come to the Money Resolution.
As I was saying when I was interrupted, there has been a considerable amount of misconception in regard to this. The Government brought in a Bill to increase the capital of the National Stud. That matter was before the House on Second Reading. On that occasion, Deputies from all Parties, with the exception of two, voted in favour of the proposal which is now before the House on the present stage. It is before the House not just as a Government decision but as the decision of Deputies representing the Fianna Fáil Party, the Fine Gael Party, the Independents, Fine Gael Independents and independent Independents. This matter is before us now not in the vicious political atmosphere that would be endeavoured to be created by Deputy Blowick, Deputy Flanagan and Deputy O'Higgins.
If the Deputy is not careful, Tulyar will be a steeplechaser before he is finished speaking.
This Bill is before us now with the almost unanimous support of the House, and not in a bitter political atmosphere at all.
This is the Money Resolution and not the Bill.
The Money Resolution is taken in conjunction with the Committee Stage of the Bill. The position is that 21 Deputies out of a House of 147 opposed the last stage of the Bill.
How many voted for it?
Over 66. The position is that this Bill should have passed all its stages the last night. I think there would have been agreement to let the Minister have all stages of it the last night but for one Deputy who voted for the Bill and who, for some reason, said that he would not allow that. He said that the Minister would have to come back another day. That was a very peculiar attitude for that Deputy to take, but of course any Deputy is entitled to take it.
Thanks.
Of course, the Deputy who did take it did not take it for himself. He took it in his usual presumptuous manner as Leader of the side that is over there. Were it not for that fact, we would not have had this discussion this evening. I am pointing that out to Deputies who apparently do not realise that this is an all-Party Bill.
Cod.
It has been agreed to by Deputies in all Parties. Even in the Labour Party, we found the Leader there in favour of it at least to the extent that he would not oppose it.
That is lawyer's talk.
It is no lawyer's talk. There is no necessity, therefore, to introduce the atmosphere that we have had.
The Deputy is going to walk a few times through the Division Lobby before it is finished.
I will be on the winning side.
And that justifies the Deputy?
I have often been on the losing side.
The Deputy might address himself to the Money Resolution.
As I say, I get aconsiderable amount of enjoyment out of this discussion. This is the type of Bill that, in any country in the world, a Party with the least tendency towards socialism would be in favour of.
That is the best yet. You should get that framed.
This is a company that has been set up by the State. It has been given public money to develop an essential State industry. Deputy O'Higgins is perfectly right in his attitude. He represents the old capitalist system and says this should not be done by the State, that it should be done by private individuals—by the bloodstock owners. Deputy O'Higgins is making no fool of himself in this. He can see clearly much farther than his nose, but unfortunately we find the Labour Party being led by Deputy Dunne into this anti-socialist attitude in regard to this measure.
Deputy Briscoe is becoming worried about you.
I do not mind whether he is or not. I am saying what is perfectly right. This is what the Labour Party in any country would be supporting—the provision of funds for a State company to bring about national development.
Such as we have in the case of the railways?
Our great trouble is that we have the railways, we have the Post Office, we have the National Stud, we have the E.S.B., and we have a number of other bodies, but we just have not enough of them.
If you look at the railways we have too many of them.
We cannot have this wide discussion on the Money Resolution.
May I say, in reply to Deputy O'Donnell, that he also is perfectly right from his point of view? He, too, sees just beyond his nose in the same way as Deputy O'Higgins does, but Deputy Dunne does not see beyond his nose, and that is the troublehere. This is a type of Bill which every member of the Labour Party should be supporting if they had any regard for principles. They have not, and that is a regrettable and unfortunate thing. I probably will get opportunities in the future of availing of the machinery of this House to teach a few fundamental principles to Deputy Dunne, and I will avail of every opportunity.
While you are here.
You had better cram them, then.
I realise it will be difficult. I may say to Deputy Giles, who says I may not be here long, that I may not and that I may. That is what happens.
That is the gamble.
Like Uncle Joe, you may pass out.
I may. I hope I will have as many people praying for me.
Is it for your conversion?
And with that, Fianna Fáil's court jester concludes.
I regret very sincerely that at no stage has this debate been in its proper perspective. I want to make a few useful inquiries from the Minister. If he answers them, he will put this matter at rest once and for all. This is a provision to increase the capital of the National Stud. I happen to know a little about the functioning of the National Stud, not, as improperly suggested by a Deputy on this side of the House, having some relationship with breeding, but with having some interest and an inquiring mind where a national venture is concerned and having close personal friendship with certain members of the board.
I want the Minister to inform the House what is the real position in the National Stud. Leaving the issue of Tulyar out of the discussion at the moment, am I right in saying that, sofar as the National Stud is concerned, there has been a very considerable improvement in its assets, thanks to the management and control of it to date? Is not it true to say to this House that some of the purchases made by the National Stud already, on the limited capital that they have been issued, have appreciated in value more than 100 per cent.? Is not it true to say that an investment by the National Stud in a sire called Royal Charger has already improved the capital position of this company by not less than £75,000 to £80,000? Is not it also true to say that the progressive, successful breeding policy of the National Stud has enhanced the value of the mares in the possession of the National Stud considerably? So that, when we are increasing the capital of the National Stud to £500,000, in fact we are increasing the capital of a concern that has already proved itself to be a sound economic venture.
I think it is time that we came back to the realities of the situation. Let us analyse the National Stud for what it is. Deputy O'Higgins put the point of view that the breeders are the people who should make this investment. I do not subscribe to that point of view because I know from experience, having a very deep interest of the bloodstock business and knowing, in a limited way, something about breeding, that, in the case of sires in the possession of people outside the National Stud, the unfortunate small man who may have a very useful mare has not got a hope of getting a nomination—I am not afraid to say that—unless it is pay in advance and pay at the maximum price. In fact, the story is well known in breeding circles that the little man from the County Meath who took a mare to My Prince, and made it the greatest stallion of all time, had his mare locked up by the breeder until he paid the fee.
Is not that the reason why the National Stud was created?
I will develop my own argument. I have it fairly considered. I am making my speech with a certain amount of deliberation.
I am not contradicting. I am just adding to it.
I am anxious to get this matter into perspective. The Minister can be of real service to the country by giving us an idea of what the assets of the National Stud are and by showing, away from this transient discussion of whether Tulyar is the best horse in the world or not, what the functioning of this stud has been.
I think the functioning of the stud to date has more than justified the decision taken by a previous Dáil that we would have a National Stud. It is very ill-advised of us, in the light of that experience, to deny to that National Stud the right to carry on on the best possible lines.
My feeling about Tulyar is the same as it was when I spoke on Second Reading, that, taking the balance of probabilities, with a reasonable amount of luck and with a bit of goodwill on the part of the Irish people, this should prove a new basis for development of bloodstock at home. If the progeny of Tulyar are as successful as I would wish them to be, there is a basis there for an immense increase in earning potential of the branch of our horse-breeding industry that has not kept pace with the other side of it. Our jumper and chaser have an unrivalled international reputation. In the hour before we started this discussion we got evidence of that in a triumph in the Gold Cup for Irish chasers to-day. Flat breeding in this country has improved extremely over the last couple of years.
I am so adamant in my support of the purchase of Tulyar because I believe that this gives us an opportunity to go into the two-year-old or three-year-old classes in competition with England, France and America. It is only when you get into the very high-grade classic breed in this particular stock that you increase your earning potential. If Tulyar is half as good as I believe he will be, his yearlings for the first, second and third years may in the aggregate be worth anything from £200,000 to £400,000 per year.
Deputy O'Higgins is equally earnestin his view and has a right to hold that view. People may laugh and say that there is no sense in leaving the issue of Tulyar, as we have done on this side of the House, to the individual judgment of each Deputy. I think we are right. I am terribly sorry that that is not the general position in the House because I firmly believe that thinking people would not be led astray by sidelines or by the fact that this racehorse is put into a situation in which he should not be. If there were a reasonable approach to this matter, the House would take the view that this is a matter that is worth analysis on its merits. I want the Minister to put the country's mind at rest. He can do us a great service. In increasing the capital of the National Stud to £500,000 we are doing no more and no less than giving the stud better scope for real development. On the Minister's own statement, there will be a considerable amount, running to £60,000 or £65,000, of capital unexpended after this. My feeling about the National Stud is that we should not in the first stage have been niggardly about this capital. Had I been in the House then, I would have been inclined to make the upper ceiling of the capital a good deal higher and to give the directors the right to come, in certain circumstances, to the Minister for a further call up.
This whole issue, I firmly believe, has never been honestly discussed on its merits. I think that as a result of good judgment and effort the assets of the National Stud have been so enhanced that, even without Tulyar, the National Stud would not be over-capitalised in its present position at £500,000. I know what the value of a horse like Royal Charger is and how it has been improved. I firmly believe that the horses in the National Stud are now making a name for themselves. Let us put Tulyar into that trio, with the same wish for his future, because if you can get that kind of balance in the National Stud, I venture to say that many of the people who may be, in an honest and in a sincere way, opposed to this particular venture may feel very pale and wan in the light of the achievement that could be brought about.
There are two points of view. My point of view is that we are at least creating a potentiality for a tremendous development of the best two-year-old and three-year-old type of horses in Ireland. I feel that if Tulyar is a success it will not be an infrequent but a general achievement of Irish breeders to be able to compete in the English Derby and in the English and French classic races. We will not have the position that only with a breeder of immense wealth will there be the possibility of a Derby winner. I believe that on the basis of this new change in strain and line of breeding in the National Stud we may find that the small men will get an opportunity, not only of breeding, but perhaps of owning and training the very best type of classic horse which may be the progeny of Tulyar. I will have no hesitation in answering to the people of West Cork whom I represent for my views on this matter—I know that they are oppressed by many problems and that there are difficulties created for them by the failure of the Government economic policy—in saying that I would be doing very poor service to them as their representative if I allowed my appreciation of their many sufferings to dull my judgment as to what might be something of real national value, as I believe it will be.
I believe the Minister could indicate to the House what the real assets of the National Stud are, what the improvement of the general situation in the National Stud has been, thanks to the prudent management, control and development of the stud. In the light of that and of the enhanced value of the effort already made by the National Stud, I think the House would take a more reasoned view of it. As I said, I do not think the debate has been brought to the proper level. I do not think it is too much to ask this House to allow the National Stud to have a capital of £500,000. In fact, if Tulyar was not in the picture and if the Minister had come, in a general way, to ask for a substantial increase in the capital of the National Stud to enable improvements to be carried out in buildings, to allow of the purchase of a group of mares or the acquisition of more land, and painted a differentpicture from the one which was a little bit distorted out of perspective by the fact that one horse cost so much and one of the richest men in the world was to get the biggest price ever for a horse, I think the House would be very slow to question the wisdom of such an investment in the National Stud. I do not question it.
Let people say what they will about sudden storms arising in regard to the position of the National Stud. I think there is such an inherent sportsmanship in the ordinary Irishman that he will wish good luck to this effort of the National Stud.
The Labour Party's view has been put fairly well and fairly honestly by the speakers on the Second Reading. We indicated that as a Party we had nothing to say against the National Stud as such; that we had nothing to say against the purchase of Tulyar on the merits of the horse or that we did not wish either the National Stud or Tulyar any particular harm. But we did point out that there was a certain amount of risk in paying such a price at such a time. We contrasted the spending of this £250,000 with the present unemployment and heavy taxation in a country which the Taoiseach claimed was groaning under heavy taxation. I think that was not unfair. I think that Deputies like Deputy Briscoe should not take us to task for doing that, if it is our honest opinion. I would not have spoken but for the fact that I want to repudiate the suggestion made by Deputy Briscoe that, because we cannot produce letters or telegrams protesting against the purchase of Tulyar, we are unable to interpret the wishes of our constituents. It may be correct that he has got letters or telegrams. I certainly have got no letters or telegrams, but I am still satisfied that the ordinary people in my constituency whom I represent and who voted for me do not agree with the giving of this £250,000 to the National Stud at such a time as this. I would be failing in my duty if I did not express that view and vote according to what I believe is the attitude of the people I represent.
I deplore the attempt to pour abuseon Deputy Dunne, as I deplored the attempt to pour abuse on Deputy Briscoe by people on this side some time in the past. I do not agree with personalities. As for the contribution made by Deputy Cowan, when he used this Bill to have a crack at his former colleagues in Clann na Poblachta and his former colleagues in the Labour Party, I think it was deplorable and that this House should not be treated to such things as that. It is not so very long ago since Deputy Cowan's new friends were claiming that he was in receipt of Moscow gold.
Surely that does not arise.
I am answering the suggestion that the Labour Party was influenced by British money or by British journals. That suggestion has the same value as the suggestion that the Deputy was in receipt of Moscow gold. As a Party, we are not arguing the merits of the National Stud or the merits of Tulyar. We are protesting that this is not the time to spend £250,000 to increase the capital of the National Stud while there are people in want.
I had not intended speaking again on this matter. I thought I had indicated my views fairly clearly on the Second Reading but, having regard to Deputy Briscoe's remarks, I feel now that he apparently either did not hear my views or does not appreciate them. Lest there be any misunderstanding I want to repeat them now.
In the course of the Second Reading I indicated that I regarded it as an act of public indecency to tell the State employees, on the one hand, that there was no money available to meet an award made in their favour by an agreed arbitration tribunal and, on the other hand, to come to the House with a proposal to spend £250,000 on the purchase of a racehorse. In my view that is a matter which is not capable of being understood by any section of the public.
Not the way you are putting it.
It is an act of public indecency.
The Government is not buying this racehorse.
The Government is coming to this House and asking the House to vote £250,000 to enable this horse to be bought.
No. It is not for the purpose you have suggested.
Is the Minister at this late stage trying to quibble as to the purpose for which the money will be used?
I am not going to permit you to misrepresent the case.
I thought the Minister admitted long since that this money would be obtained in order to purchase a racehorse.
No.
Then the Minister has certainly allowed the discussion to range very wide of its objective.
Surely it is not to go on a holiday they want it.
Deputy Briscoe and all the Deputies who spoke in favour of this measure spoke throughout on the assumption that the money was required to buy a racehorse. They very frankly, and I pay tribute to them for their frankness, said that it was of course a gamble and justified it on the grounds that it was a gamble. The Minister will remember that on the last occasion on which I spoke he had a long discussion with me as to whether they were right or wrong in entering into something that is a gamble and he quite fairly admitted, and I think this must be admitted by anybody who considers the position, that the purchase of this racehorse was a sheer gamble.
I did not. I said any purchase was a gamble.
But that arose out of statements made by Deputy Briscoe that he admitted that it was a gamble.
Tell us about the bulls now.
Are the Minister and Deputy Briscoe trying to run away from the fact——
Certainly not, not from you, anyhow.
——that this money is being sought to purchase Tulyar. The whole country has been talking about it during the past three weeks. Is it suggested now that this money is being sought for some other purpose altogether? I am quite prepared to be absolutely fair with the Minister, but at least let us face facts as they are and let us not quibble.
Who is quibbling?
The Minister says this money is not being sought for the purchase of this racehorse. The only purpose for which the money is being sought is for the purchase of this racehorse.
No, and again, no.
May I ask what the House has been discussing then on three separate days if it is not the purchase of a racehorse?
Read my statement.
That is a quibble.
It is not a quibble. Read my statement and you will see.
The whole discussion on this matter——
You are not getting away with that.
Are you prepared to support this Bill? Would the Deputy like to hear what he said?
"I am prepared to support this Bill on condition that he makes available £250,000 for the purchase of premium bulls."
Deputy Briscoe had the advantage of reading my speech and he will now kindly listen to this portion of my speech which summarises my views.
What column?
Column 1653 of the Official Report of 25th February, 1953:—
"I submit to the House that it is an act of public indecency to say, on the one hand, that we have no money at all, that the State is reduced to such a state of bankruptcy that we cannot afford to make an award without the introduction of a special Budget, and within a few days to come and ask this House to vote £250,000 for a racehorse which, at best, is only a gamble. In circumstances where the economic position of the country was favourable, in circumstances where the country was looking for an outlet for investment, then by all means there might be a case to be made for the investment in this racehorse."
Would the Deputy read column 1650?
"I am not qualified; I know nothing about it; I am prepared to accept everything the Minister and Deputy Dillon have said about the horse, but they all agree that it is just a gamble."
What about column 1650?
Deputy Briscoe will kindly allow me to make my own speech at the moment. If there is any portion of my speech he would like me to read I will read it for him, but I take it that he admits that this money is being sought, in effect, for the purchase of a racehorse.
No.
I asked the question of Deputy Briscoe. Possibly he can answer it.
Would you like me to answer?
Is the money being sought for the purchase of a racehorse?
Does the Deputy want me to answer? If he sits down I will answer him. If he asks me to say "yes" or "no" that is too old a story.
It is quite easy for the Deputy to say whether or not this money is being sought for the purchase of a racehorse ramed Tulyar.
If the Deputy gives way I will answer him.
The Deputy is quite prepared to interrupt. If he is prepared to answer that question "yes" or "no" I will take his answer.
The Deputy is just playing.
Deputy MacBride should come to the Money Resolution.
Deputy Briscoe is adept at quibbling not merely here but elsewhere.
Deputy MacBride should keep his remarks in order. The Deputy should come to the Money Resolution.
I will if the Chair will keep Deputy Briscoe and the Minister in order. So far I have not noticed any protection for me from Deputy Briscoe or the Minister.
That is a reflection on the Chair.
On the last occasion I indicated that I welcomed the introduction of this Bill because it was an indication that the speeches made by members of the Government during the course of the last 18 months to the effect that the State was bankrupt were obviously wrong.
Surely that does not arise on the Money Resolution.
Deputy Briscoe has been quoting from my speech and I am continuing the quotation.
The Deputy will not be allowed to continuein that strain. He must come to the Money Resolution. This is not the Second Reading of the Bill and the House has already confirmed the principle of the Bill. There is nothing before the House now except the Money Resolution.
I respectfully submit I had no intention of speaking on the subject. I was brought to my feet by reason of the fact that Deputy Briscoe and Deputy Cowan both devoted a large portion of the statements they had to make to what I was alleged to have said or not said last week. I am surely entitled to reply to that.
The Minister a few minutes ago sought to deny that this money was being sought for the purchase of a racehorse. I would refer him to his own statement at column 1603, Volume 136, of the Dáil Debates of 25th February, 1953, in which he said:—
"The enactment of this Bill is now urgently necessary, following on the recent acquisition by the company of a very valuable horse named Tulyar."
The purpose of the Bill is to provide £250,000. The price of the horse, I understand, is £250,000.
You know they have £25,000 still unexpended.
Then the Minister should not come to the House looking for £250,000. If they have so much money then they do not require any money from the House.
Would the Deputy tell us——
Deputy Briscoe has already spoken, and he might allow Deputy MacBride to make his speech in his own way.
They can be read.
Yes. I hope they will be circulated far and wide. Another Deputy talked at length on the prestige that the purchase of this racehorse would bring to Ireland. I think that the purchase of this horse by aState which boasts of higher unemployment, higher emigration than any other country in Europe, that boasts of 90,000 unemployed will bring very little prestige to the country. The expenditure of £250,000 on work that would relieve some of the unemployment might bring prestige to the Government. Public opinion outside this country would find it very hard to understand how this Government that claims to be bankrupt, that claims to be unable to pay its servants, that claims to be unable to provide employment, to provide money for public works, can afford to spend £250,000 on a racehorse which is described by the Minister himself as a gamble.
Both the Government and the other speakers who supported this Resolution appear to misconceive the arguments and the reasons why others oppose it. Speaking for myself, I do not oppose this Resolution on the grounds that Tulyar is a bad horse, on the grounds that the National Stud is not being properly managed or on the grounds that it may possibly prove a bad investment. My sole objection to this Resolution being passed by the House is that at this particular time we cannot afford it. That is my only reason. I am not going to criticise the merits or the demerits of the horse and despite what the Minister may now say the money is being provided, and the Minister has told us so, for the purchase of this horse Tulyar.
At the risk of being pulled up by the Chair I will give my reasons why we cannot afford to pass this Resolution at the moment. Were I to quote at length, nothing could speak better against the Resolution than the speeches delivered by the Minister for Finance and the Tánaiste over the past 18 months. During all that time they have been telling us we are expending too much, be it on capital investment or otherwise. They have also been telling us they cannot afford various necessities.
Luxuries.
I do not think Deputy Allen is right in calling, say,an increase in pay for the Civil Service a luxury when the cost of living has gone up.
The Deputy seems to be embarking on a debate on the economic policy of the State. We are discussing a Money Resolution.
With the greatest respect, Sir, I am giving my reasons why I am voting against this Money Resolution. We cannot afford it in our present economic position. I am advancing arguments as to why we cannot afford it. We have been told by Deputy Briscoe that he has heard no outcry against the expenditure of this money.
Because it was alleged that there was.
I do not wish to quote any particular paper, but I am sure most Deputies in this House have hear of a paper called the Irish Catholic.It was quoted from at length here by some of the Deputies on the Labour Benches.
Deputy Donnellan quoted from it. He is not a Labour member.
The Irish Catholicis a paper which is widely read. It is the mouthpiece of a considerable number of the people of this State and it gives reasons why we should not spend this money now on the purchase of a racehorse. Deputy Captain Cowan has told us that this Bill was passed by a majority of all Parties in the House. I am practically three and a half years in this House, a short time, I admit, but I have never known Fianna Fáil to split and divide on any Bill. The Whip is always on.
That does not arise on the Money Resolution.
With respect, Sir, I suggest it arises out of the arguments put forward by those supporting the Money Resolution.
The Deputy must come to the Money Resolution.
As I said before, were I to quote at length from the speeches from the ministerial bench over there, I could not give better arguments against this Resolution than they have given. Deputy Briscoe has told us that we have money for all the bulls we want to purchase in the country. No later than this evening's post I had a letter from the Minister telling me that he regretted he could not provide a bull for an area in the congested district of West Donegal.
Deputy O'Donnell cannot discuss an application for bulls for West Donegal on this Money Resolution.
Give us the reason for that bull.
We have enough Kerry bulls for the moment. No later than last week the Minister told us in this House that owing to our financial position he was unable to provide seed potatoes and seed oats for certain districts in West Donegal.
The Deputy is travelling wide of the Resolution. He must come to the Money Resolution.
Tulyar may have won most of his races under the whip. This Resolution is certainly going through under the Fianna Fáil Whip and no other.
It is a pity that the circumstance arose that the discussion on the purchase of this horse and the discussion on the necessity for increasing the money provided for the National Stud have arisen together.
I wonder what Deputy O'Donnell, Deputy Byrne or any of the other opponents of the Money Resolution would say if this National Stud were still owned and managed by the British Government. I am sure they would have great respect for it.
If the BritishGovernment put up the money to manage it, we would not object.
You are objecting to your own Government putting money into it.
Order!
Is it in order for a Deputy to accuse other Deputies in this House of being anxious to support British institutions?
That is not a point of order, to begin with. No charge was made against any Deputy.
I would not think of charging Deputy MacEoin of supporting anything British.
Is it not a fact that the names of the people associated with the National Stud are predominantly British at the moment?
The Chairman of the National Stud has an impeccable national record.
Deputy Allen.
When the National Stud was set up in this country, it became the property of the Irish people and the capital at that time was fixed at £250,000. From all sides of the House the then Minister for Agriculture— now the Minister for Health—was lauded as doing the right thing in acquiring the Tully Stud in County Kildare, Deputy Norton's constituency, for the nation.
As I say the capital at that time was fixed at £250,000. To my mind we have heard the greatest nonsense ever uttered in regard to the purchase of this horse. We hear a lot of talk about the unemployed and their poverty and it is suggested that this money might be divided in pence and halfpennies to be given to the unemployed. Every Irishman, poor or rich, has always been proud of the fact that this country was able to produce horses which brought honour to the nation, whether these horses were included in the Army jumping team, were winners of the Grand National or were Irish horses like theanimal, ridden by an Irishman, which won the Cheltenham Gold Cup to-day beating the cream of England and France. Every Irishman is proud of the fact that another Irish horse Teapot II also won to-day. I am glad to be able to tell the House——
No. We can get all this in the morning papers.
I am sure that when a horse that was bred in Deputy Dunne's constituency, Caughoo, won the Grand National and when the workers of County Dublin walked into town with bands and banners——
Deputy Allen must now come to the Resolution.
Deputy Dunne, I am sure, led the procession.
You must have been seeing things. That is the first I heard about it.
I am sure that on some future occasion we shall also see Deputy Dunne leading the workers of County Dublin to welcome the winners of big races abroad, horses of world renown. We are here considering a proposal of the Minister to increase the capital of the National Stud and the suggestion is put forward that this money is being taken out of taxation. Well the persons who made that suggestion know that it is not being taken out of taxation. The directors of the National Stud are being authorised to increase their capital by this amount; it will cost the Exchequer nothing, though I am subject to correction on that. It is not a charge on the Exchequer. The interest and the sinking fund on that money will come out of National Stud money.
Where will they get it.
The stud has now arrived at the point at which it is earning the cost of its maintenance, paying income-tax and giving good employment to a great number of workers on the National Stud farm. I am sure there is no objection to that. That is the reason why Deputy Norton did notcome in here, like his colleagues in the Party, to object to this Money Resolution. He remained carefully away from the House during the discussion of the Bill. With Deputy Sweetman and Deputy Harris he has a big share in this concern. He is the biggest shareholder in Ireland in horseflesh to-day.
What has this to do with the Bill?
On a point of order, the Deputy should be called upon to explain that remark. Deputy Norton has no financial interest in the National Stud and that should be made clear.
The Chair must intervene to point out that Deputies are endeavouring to debate matters which are totally irrelevant to the question before the House. Deputy Allen will now come to the Money Resolution or remain seated.
I have no doubt that if some Deputies did not wish to create prejudice or did not hope to get some political kudos out of their opposition, they would support the Money Resolution fully. I hope they will get sense and support the Minister like Deputy Norton. Deputy Norton is a big shareholder in bloodstock in this country.
I asked the Deputy to explain what he meant when he alleged that Deputy Norton had an interest or a share in this institution. No one knows better than the Deputy who made it the effect that statement will have unless there is a proper explanation of it given. The rank and file might assume that it was a financial interest the Deputy meant.
I would not suggest that for a moment.
I want to place on record my own opposition to the spending of this money at the present time. I know nothing at all about the gentlemen concerned in the management of the National Stud. I happen to be one of the few Deputies who can say that he was never on a racecourse in his life.
And never put a shilling on a horse?
No. I had a lesson one time and I can give a good reason for it.
Some other time.
I shall give you a good reason. We had a certain kind of strike one time and we had nothing to pay the men. I know where we got the money when we had the stable boys out on strike 25 or 30 years ago. I know where the money came from. That is why I never backed a horse. Deputy Briscoe asked whether we could produce letters or telegrams. I cannot, but owing to the pending by-election in the County Wicklow in my own constituency—I regret the circumstances which rendered this necessary —I met men, even supporters of the Fianna Fáil Party, who were very loud in their protest against the spending of such a huge amount of money at a time when the Minister for Finance alleges that we are practically a bankrupt nation. Deputy Briscoe is very popular in Bray, and I am sure he will have an opportunity in the very near future of meeting some of the 800 or 900 men who are unfortunately compelled to sign at the labour exchange.
I indicated quite clearly an hour ago that unemployment may not be discussed on this Resolution. Deputies on both sides of the House have tried to discuss irrelevant matters. Either the Resolution will be spoken to or the Deputy will sit down.
I am merely pointing out that those men have to pay 5/- for a lb. of butter and a loaf of bread. They would not approve of the expenditure of £250,000 at the present time.
The Deputy is absolutely ignoring the instructions of the Chair.
We are asked to spend £250,000 at a time when we are told by the Minister for Finance and by the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs that we have to eat less and work harder.
The Deputy will either speak to the Money Resolution or resume his seat.
Other Deputies got an opportunity of speaking here about unemployment and Deputy Allen could speak about unemployment. I very seldom take up the time of the House.
I stopped Deputy Allen from discussing unemployment in the reverse order to which Deputy Everett is endeavouring to discuss it. I will not allow it to be discussed either way.
I want to explain our position to Deputy Cowan who said that the Labour Party should have regarded this as one of the schemes of socialism which the State should take over and that the State should pay and then put up with the losses. If a good proposition was put up to the Labour Party to control various national concerns, we would probably have no objection, but when we are asked to spend £250,000 in this manner, we say that better use could be made of that sum by utilising it to reduce the burdens placed on the people at the present time, burdens which the Taoiseach says are practically impossible to bear.
Deputy Cowan made great play in regard to the support that the public should give. I am not making any accusation against any Deputy as to which way he should vote. Every Deputy is entitled to vote according to his conscience. I do say, however, that if some of the Fianna Fáil Deputies were given a free hand they would probably go into the Lobby with me to-night. Deputy Briscoe is probably consistent and honest in speaking out his mind as to what he believes is right. As we recognise his right, surely our rights should be recognised without accusations being made. If we are opposed to the expenditure of this money at the present time, it is because we believe that greater use could be made of it and better benefits provided for the people of Ireland by utilising it in other ways.
If the Minister has any doubts about it, he can postpone the matter until the result of the by-election in Wicklowis known. Telegrams or letters will not be required then and I am certain that even supporters of Fianna Fáil will vote against the expenditure of this money.
This is a Money Resolution asking the House to vote money for the National Stud. I cannot see that anything that the Deputy says bears any reference whatever to the Money Resolution.
I oppose it and I believe I am interpreting the wishes of my constituents by opposing the huge waste of money and the burdens which were placed on the people by the Budget. I suggest that the people are being betrayed at the present time by a minority Government which has no mandate whatever to put this charge on the people of the country. For that reason, I believe I am interpreting not only the wishes of the people at the present time but also visualising the results of the by-election. I am interpreting the wishes of the majority of the people who, when given an opportunity, will vote in no uncertain manner and show that I am expressing their views to-night when they place the candidate at the bottom of the poll.
I understand that the purpose of this Resolution is to provide additional money to enlarge the capital of the National Stud proper. I think that at a time when the efforts of the people who have the interests of this country at heart are directed towards promoting every national enterprise that is designed to increase the income of the nation, to provide additional employment and to enlarge our exports, we should be unanimous in supporting a proposal of this kind.
I was impressed by the fact that so many leading members of the Opposition Parties came into the House to support this proposal. I think it is a desirable thing that men who are elected to the Dáil on popular franchise should be big enough to place narrow Party interests aside and view a question of this kind from the long-term national interest. If there was ever a question of long-term nationalinterest involved in any issue that arose in this House it would be in respect of the enlargement of the capital of this company. Any Deputy can come into this House and seek to make political capital out of the expenditure that was incurred by the National Stud Company on the purchase of a horse recently.
As representing the farmers, do you believe in your heart it is right?
I would say this. I am not an expert on horse-breeding. I do not claim to be as singularly abstentionist in regard to races as Deputy Everett. I have now and then put a shilling on a horse and I have just now and then attended race meetings. I do not claim to be an expert on horseracing, but I have heard men who can speak with some authority on this matter express their view in favour of this purchase. I listened attentively to Deputies Dillon, Cosgrave and Collins on this subject and I found that they have absolute confidence that the horse recently purchased by the National Stud Company is a first-class animal, and that, with luck, it ought to produce a profit for the National Stud Company and for the horse-breeding industry generally. That is all that one can say.
Every enterprise of this kind carries with it an element of risk. If you put money into the development of a factory in the County Wicklow, the County Kildare or anywhere else, you may lose your money and you may not make any great profit, but at least you are entering upon an enterprise which you have reasonable ground for hoping will bring profit to the company and the nation. That is all that can be said in regard to the matter.
I think we have listened to a lot of nauseatingly dishonest criticism of this proposal. I think there are people who know perfectly well that the Minister and the National Stud Company are endeavouring to do what they think is best for the horse-breeding industry and for the nation, but because some Deputies think there are some political kudos to be obtainedby opposing this project they come into the House to oppose it aggressively.
I think we have got to face this question realistically. There is no question whatever of taking money out of the State revenues to finance the purchase of this particular horse.
Where will it come from?
From the Hospitals' Trust Fund.
I mean tax revenue. There is no question of taking money out of tax revenue. There is a question of providing an investment out of borrowed money. If the State raises money for national development, they are as much entitled to put some of it into the development of the National Stud as they are to put it into a hydroelectric scheme or a turf development scheme, or any scheme designed to give employment and increase the output of the nation. Increased exports ought to be regarded as beneficial and on that ground we must support this proposal.
Deputy O'Donnell made a very unworthy suggestion, that the Government could not find money to provide a bull for Donegal. We all know there never has been any difficulty about providing money for the purchase of bulls for any county. An objection to providing a certain breed in a certain district will frequently arise on grounds that may be wise or otherwise but are considered by the Department to be wise.
There is no point in raising these frivolous objections to the enlargement of the capital of a company which is spending over £10,000 in wages each year and which is assisting in a far-reaching way the improvement of one particular branch of our national activities. There is no truth in the suggestion that the investment of this money will deprive some other industry or enterprise of the capital it requires. We have shown last year that it is possible to raise within the country whatever capital the State requires.
As long as that is so, we can raiseany capital needed for any industry or economic enterprise that may need State assistance. It would be well for Deputies of the Opposition not to advertise so loudly and so vehemently the division in their ranks on this important proposition. If they are honest and honourable men, they will give fair consideration, not perhaps to the points put by the Minister but at least to those put by the former Minister for Agriculture, by Deputy Collins and Deputy Cosgrave. Those men have studied the case in a reasonable way and they should be entitled to expect that members of their own Party and of Parties associated with them here would give them a fair and reasonable hearing.
This is the first time you have ever agreed with Deputy Dillon.
I have often agreed with Deputy Dillon and disagreed with him and I always had the courage to agree or disagree as I though fit. I am not one of those who lick the boots of any particular Minister or ex-Minister.
You are right there; they are licking your boots.
It was also unworthy of some Deputies to say that because a certain sum is being provided to finance this company there will not be enough to finance other State expenditure such as social services and the relief of unemployment. I suppose that was an irrelevant suggestion but even if it were relevant it should not have been made. We can raise from the resources of this nation all the money we require for works of national development.
I want to stress what was said by Deputy MacBride as on this point I would rather agree with him:—
"In circumstances where the country was looking for an outlet for investment, then by all means there might be a case to be made for the investment in this racehorse."
That is from the Official Report for the 25th February, column 1653. Deputy MacBride said that if we were looking for something in which to invest moneyprofitably, then we would support this project. That is exactly the position: we are looking for enterprises in which to invest money profitably. Anyone who studies economics or the development of industry must realise how hard it is to find a suitable project here in which to invest money with any reasonable hope of remuneration.
Millions of acres of Irish land. Acres and acres of forests.
We talked for long enough about forestry to-day and we came up against the problem there of getting remuneration out of the money we invest.
We may not discuss forestry on this, nor any other counter-proposal.
This is the kind of investment for which we are looking, something in which we can invest Irish money with a hope that it will provide employment for our people, that it will increase the output of the nation, that it will increase the exports of the nation and that it will do good generally for our people. That is the kind of investment we are looking for, as Deputy MacBride said, and that is the kind we have found and for which we are seeking to provide money in this Resolution.
Since the purpose of this Irish National Stud is to ensure that the benefits of the first class breeding stock are distributed widely amongst breeders of horses throughout the country, I would suggest to the Minister that special consideration be given to the small breeder, to farmers who are owners of first-class mares. I think that is one of the fundamental purposes of this National Stud and one that ought to be fulfilled, that farmers or other small breeders who own first-class mares should be allowed to derive benefit from this investment.
I should like to be able to present a particular report for Deputy Briscoe's benefit. He told us that, so far as his constituency was concerned—he represents a working-class populace—the move bythe National Stud to purchase the racehorse Tulyar was a most popular move indeed. On the other hand, he said that members of the Labour Party and those who voted against this Bill were merely making an effort to grab a few odd votes. That contention was also made by Deputy Cowan and Deputy Cogan. If the proposal is so popular as Deputy Briscoe would have us believe, we are merely trying to lose ourselves votes. The picture which Deputy Briscoe would like me to paint is this: last weekend, as I went through Wexford town, practically every unemployed man I met abused me for voting against this Bill, a Bill to advance £250,000 for the purchase of the racehorse Tulyar; every housewife I met said that the Government should be congratulated for advancing the sum of money to the National Stud for the purchase of this horse; and at every branch meeting I attended, there was a motion of censure on me for attempting to vote against this wonderful capital investment. That is the type of picture Deputy Briscoe would have me present, but I am afraid it is not the picture I can present.
I wonder how far intolerance can be brought. It seems like a sacrilege now, after listening to Deputy Briscoe, Deputy Cowan and Deputy Cogan, to oppose anything brought in by this Government. I would be prepared to subject myself to a by-election or a general election on the issue of Tulyar alone, funny as it may be to some of the Deputies on the Government Benches. If it is unpopular for me to denounce the purchase of Tulyar, I am prepared to face the consequences, at least so far as my constituents are concerned.
They will have an opportunity in Wicklow.
Deputy Cowan would try to teach us Socialism and try to give us a policy of nationalisation for this country. He says it is surely against the principles and policy of the Labour Party to vote against a Bill which is a 100 per cent. Socialist measure. If I were ever to be as full-blooded a Socialist asDeputy Cowan, I should imagine that measures of nationalisation of which he spoke would be intended for the greater good of the greater number of the community and I do not believe, as Deputy O'Higgins said he did not believe—irrespective of his Party affiliations or mine—that this measure of nationalisation is for the public good, for the greater good of the greater number of the community, at present and in present circumstances.
It would be ridiculous for me to refute some of the comic relief allegations made by Deputy Cowan. These have been fairly frequent from Deputy Cowan over the past few months. He provides the comic relief in the course of discussions embarrassing for the members of the Government. There is no sinister campaign against the purchase of Tulyar. Surely he speaks with his tongue in his cheek; surely he does not speak with conviction, when he alleges against any member of the Labour Party who has spoken that we would ally ourselves with any British influences who would be jealous of the purchase of Tulyar in an attempt to stop the purchase or to stop the National Stud from owning the horse.
I should like to say why I am opposed to this Money Resolution. I am not in favour of this House giving permission to the Government to provide any moneys from the Central Fund for the purpose of operating this measure. My reason is this, that I believe this Government cannot afford to advance £250,000 to the National Stud for the purchase of Tulyar when they will not advance the same amount of money for the relief of unemployment. I believe this country cannot afford £250,000 on such a luxury investment when the country is in the state it is in, a situation in which there are approximately 600 less than 90,000 people unemployed. I do not believe that my vote should go——
I have indicated several times that I will not allow, on this Money Resolution, other matters to be discussed. The discussion must not proceed on the basis ofcontrasting Government policy on other matters—why is the money not being spent on the Army; why is it not being spent on housing or on something else? I cannot allow the entire Government policy to be discussed on this Resolution. The question before the House is whether the money should be spent for the particular purpose, and that alone.
I am merely saying that a country which has 90,000 unemployed, a country which must charge this week an extra 4d. per lb. for butter, cannot afford to give to the Minister for Agriculture to advance to the National Stud a sum of £250,000.
That is discussing Government policy, apart from this Money Resolution. The only thing before the House is, per se, whether the money should be voted for this purpose and not that it might be used for something else.
I am afraid that I could not express adequately, in any form or in any number of words, my opposition to this measure, if I were not able to relate it to the condition in which the country finds itself at present.
I cannot allow this Resolution to be discussed in connection with other problems before the country. The Deputy is at liberty to argue whether this amount of money should be used for the purpose suggested.
With all respect to your ruling, Sir——
I am ruling, and I have ruled in respect of other Deputies. I will not have my ruling discussed. The Deputy can raise it in whatever manner he likes.
I should like to contend that if I am to give my reason why this Resolution should not be passed, I must relate the Resolution to the unemployed in the country and to other projects of capital investment that could be engaged in.
I have already indicated to several Deputies that that cannot be opened. I cannot allow Deputy Corish to proceed on these lines.
They did it just the same.
With all respect, Sir, my speech—or the speech of any other Deputy—in the light of that ruling, would consist merely of a statement to the effect that I do not approve of the Government's advancing this money and it would then be a matter of sitting down.
I have indicated that, in relation to other problems before the country, the entire Government policy could be discussed, according to the statement of Deputy Mac Fheórais. I cannot allow that. That is the only reason I am giving at the moment. I have given the reasons on several occasions. If the Deputy does not accept that, he will have to resume his seat.
With all due respect, Sir, I am not a person who wishes to upset the ruling of the Chair, but I could not accept the ruling in present circumstances.
The Deputy must accept the ruling of the Chair.
May I presume to speak for a certain number of Deputies in the House who feel as I feel, that if the purchase of Tulyar is not to be related to the condition of the country at present, the situation in which it finds itself, it cannot be discussed at all?
The number of Deputies holding a particular opinion has no effect whatever on Standing Orders or on relevancy.
I want to make my protest——
The Deputy will either deal with the Resolution as the Chair indicates or resume his seat.
I do not intend to resume——
On a point of order. In your absence, a Cheann Comhairle, I think a number of references were made by Deputies on the Government side of the House bringing in the question of general policy and the implications involved.
I have no doubt that relevancy was maintained by the Chair in my absence, as it is being maintained by me now.
According to that rule, you could not say anything at all.
May I continue and give the reasons for my——
I have indicated to the Deputy that he must deal with the Money Resolution. He may not discuss unemployment, the cost of living or any other matter of that kind in relation to the Money Resolution.
I do not intend to go into details in regard to the cost of living or the remedy for it, or in regard to the unemployment situation or the remedy for it. If I am to continue in the strain in which you, Sir, direct me, the limits would be very confined indeed. I think it is only right and proper that, if I am to give any reason at all, I should give the real reason why I object to the purchase of this racehorse——
I will not have an argument with the Deputy as to relevancy. If he intends to continue along the line he was pursuing when I interrupted him, then he will be irrelevant and must resume his seat.
I spoke on the Second Reading of this Bill, and I said that I was not against the horse-breeding industry—as was alleged against us. I indicated that I was not against the operations of the National Stud but that, in present circumstances, I was not in favour of the Government's advancing to the National Stud a sum of £250,000 because of a certain situation which exists in thecountry at the present time. I submit that that is perfectly relevant to this discussion. In ordinary circumstances —and when I talk of ordinary circumstances I mean circumstances in which a serious effort would be made to cope with the unemployment situation——
The Deputy is endeavouring to proceed to discuss unemployment. If he does not desist he will please resume his seat.
I am afraid I could not.
Then I shall have to name the Deputy.
What about the further increase in the price of butter?
Deputy Corish will have to obey the directions of the Chair or else leave the House.
If I am not allowed to give my real reasons——
Is Deputy Corish resuming his seat?
No, Sir.
Then I must name Deputy Corish for disobedience to the directions of the Chair.
