Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 11 Mar 1953

Vol. 137 No. 1

Committee on Finance. - Motion by Minister for Finance.

Minister for Finance (Mr. MacEntee)

I move:—

That a sum not exceeding £34,185,410 be granted on account for or towards defraying the Charges that will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1954, for certain public services, namely:—

		£
1	President's Establishment	2,300
2	Houses of the Oireachtas	71,500
3	Department of the Taoiseach	8,800
4	Central Statistics Office	36,000
5	Comptroller and Auditor General	11,640
6	Office of the Minister for Finance	56,500
7	Office of the Revenue Commissioners	570,000
8	Office of Public Works	120,000
9	Public Works and Buildings	1,000,000
10	Employment and Emergency Schemes	228,400
11	Management of Government Stocks	30,490
12	State Laboratory	6,700
13	Civil Service Commission	17,500
14	An Chomhairle Ealaíon	6,500
15	Commissions and Special Inquiries	3,500
16	Superannuation and Retired Allowances	400,000
17	Rates on Government Property	10,000
18	Secret Service	2,500
19	Expenses under the Electoral Act and the Juries Act	—
20	Supplementary Agricultural Grants	1,100,000
21	Law Charges	37,000
22	Universities and Colleges	270,000
23	Miscellaneous Expenses	6,000
24	Stationery Office	191,000
25	Valuation and Boundary Survey	20,500
26	Ordanance Survey	20,550
27	Agriculture	1,841,000
28	Fisheries	37,000
29	Office of the Minister for Justice	26,400
30	Garda Síochána	1,159,790
31	Prisons	63,000
32	District Court	27,620
33	Circuit Court	38,000
34	Supreme Court and High Court of Justice	29,630
35	Land Registry and Registry of Deeds	29,830
36	Public Record Office	2,960
37	Charitable Donations and Bequests	1,500
38	Local Government	1,300,600
39	Office of the Minister for Education	114,000
40	Primary Education	2,650,000
41	Secondary Education	275,000
42	Technical Instruction	350,000
43	Science and Art	55,000
44	Reformatory and Industrial Schools	120,000
45	Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies	20,000
46	National Gallery	3,660
47	Lands	814,840
48	Forestry	407,000
49	Gaeltacht Services	120,000
50	Industry and Commerce	2,466,000
51	Transport and Marine Services	820,000
52	Aviation and Meteorological Services	156,270
53	Industrial and Commercial Property Registration Office	7,700
54	Posts and Telegraphs	2,476,000
55	Wireless Broadcasting	169,000
56	Defence	2,628,300
57	Army Pensions	428,860
58	External Affairs	136,150
59	International Co-operation	19,300
60	Office of the Minister for Social Welfare	195,850
61	Social Insurance	657,890
62	Social Assistance	5,977,000
63	Health	4,185,000
64	Oifig an Ard-Chláraitheora	6,880
65	Dundrum Asylum	13,500
66	Oifig na Gaeltachta agus na gCeantar gCúng	2,500
67	Tourism	125,000
TOTAL	£34,185,410

The Vote on Account is an annual feature of our financial procedure. Both this Vote and the Central Fund Bill which gives it statutory confirmation must be passed before the beginning of the new financial year. The Vote on Account, as its name implies, is a provision on account, usually a four months' provision, towards meeting expenditure on Supply Services in the new financial year. It is the practice to obtain by means of the Vote on Account enough money to enable the public services to be carried on during the period from 1st April to 31st July, in which month the Appropriation Act is usually passed. As Deputies are aware the Dáil grants supply only for the service of a particular financial year and, consequently, moneys granted by the Central Fund and Appropriation Acts are available only for use in the year in which they are voted. If there were, for instance, a surplus on the Votes for the current year, that surplus could not be carried over into 1953-54. It would have to be surrendered and would not be available to defray expenditure in the next financial year. In order, therefore, that Government services should not be brought to a standstill at the close of business on 31st of the present month, it is necessary by a Vote on Account for Dáil Éireann to grant a sufficient sum to cover expenditure on Supply Services in 1953-54 until such time, at least, as the Estimates for that year have been discussed and approved by the Dáil.

It is, as Deputies are aware, customary to provide in the Vote on Account for a sum approximating to one-third of the total of the Estimates. This proportion is subject to variation in the case of particular Estimates depending on whether the payments arising on them are expected to be heavier or lighter in the part of the year covered by the Vote. The amount asked for in this year's Vote onAccount is, as stated in the Resolution, £34,185,410.

Deputies have no doubt noted that the net total of the Estimates for the Supply Services for the coming year is £100,548,106, representing an increase of £5,676,483 on the figure published in the Volume of Estimates for 1952-53. I shall mention later how this increase arises. Meanwhile, however, regard should be had to the alterations which were made in the 1952-53 figure in the 1952 Budget. It will be recalled that this Budget provided first of all for heavy extra expenditure on social welfare services, which was offset by savings on food subsidies. Allowing for these changes, but ignoring the sum of £1,000,000 which was also included to cover unspecified Supplementary Estimates, the net figure for the Supply Services in 1952-53 was £93,954,000; so that the increased sum required to pay for these services in 1953-54 is, accordingly, £6,594,000.

The Vote on Account, founded as it is on the detailed Estimates of public expenditure set out in the Volume of Estimates, presents a statistical survey of public policy, as formulated by successive Governments and endorsed by Dáil Éireann. The policy finds expression to a large extent in voted public expenditure, the details of which are shown in the Volume. As Minister for Finance, being not only a member of Dáil Éireann and of the Government but also the custodian of the public purse, I find myself in a difficult position when I come to speak on the Vote on Account. I certainly cannot approach the question with the single-minded irresponsibility of certain Private Deputies.

Mr. Norton

You are the most irresponsible Deputy in the House.

Mr. MacEntee

As a member of Dáil Éireann and of the Government which is responsible to Dáil Éireann, I share, of course, public responsibility for the public policy embodied in the Estimates for the year 1953-54. Like all the other members of the House I share responsibility for the extra expenditure on social assistance, onhealth services, on teachers' pensions——

Mr. Norton

And on racehorses.

Mr. MacEntee

——and on the remuneration of the Civil Service. On the other hand, it will fall to me, in formulating the Budget, to try to reconcile this policy and these expenditures with the country's capacity to pay. It is only natural, therefore, that I as Minister for Finance should be concerned at the evidence which the Estimates for 1953-54 present that State expenditure still continues to mount until, without any allowance whatsoever being made for contingencies, it has now reached the point where the Supply Services require over £100,000,000 in one year.

How has this increase arisen? To answer that question it is necessary for me to refer briefly to the main services which show an increase as compared with the current financial year. Normally, as I have indicated, comparison should be made with the original Estimates for the expiring year, but it has been necessary during the year to ask for several Supplementary Estimates, often for appreciable amounts. Apart from the extra outlay on social welfare, these heavy demands were not and could not have been foreseen when the Budget was being drawn up, though a modest allowance was made to cover contingencies. There is nothing very unusual in the emergence during the year of unexpected demands of this kind.

Mr. Morrissey

To the tune of £10,000,000.

Mr. MacEntee

It has been in fact the normal experience and the year which is just closing is merely repeating it. Perhaps I should say here that the total amount provided by Supplementary Estimates in 1952-53 is £9,281,735, or almost £10,000,000 as Deputy Morrissey has reminded me, of which £4,526,915 relates to services other than social welfare, and a considerable sum, I think it is £1,100,000, represents an additional payment made to the undertaking of which Deputy Morrissey was at least the putativeparent; I refer to C.I.E. Even if the amount of these supplementaries is taken into consideration in comparing the provision for the two years, the increase in the 1953-54 provision over the total provision for 1952-53 is still as much as £2,981,348.

Supplementary Estimates are bugbears of every Minister for Finance. Unfortunately they are a recurring phenomenon. No year has been free from them, and it would be unrealistic to suppose that 1953-54 will be different in that respect, although every effort must be made and will be made to prevent their occurrence. For the purpose of our comparison with last year, therefore, I shall leave the Supplementary Estimates out of account and, in general, I shall refer back to the original provision in 1952-53. Where, however, the picture has been significantly altered by Supplementary Estimates like that taken for C.I.E. in 1952-53, I shall draw attention to them.

For the coming year the largest increases are to be found in the Estimates for Health, Social Welfare and Defence. There are significant increases as well on the Votes for Local Government, Primary Education, Lands, Forestry, Wireless Broadcasting, Army Pensions and Tourism. Broadly speaking, in so far as public outlay on the Supply Services sustains employment, welfare and individual incomes, the Estimates show that these effects will not be diminished in 1953-54 as compared with any preceding year.

The bulk of the net increase in the Health Estimate is accounted for by the fact that, owing to the exhaustion of the capital of the Hospitals' Trust Fund, it has become necessary to supplement the resources of that fund by direct Exchequer grants in order that the hospital building programme may proceed. In 1953-54 the assistance required from the Exchequer is expected to amount to what I might truthfully describe as the enormous sum of £4,500,000. In addition to this, grants to health authorities towards the cost of public health services show an increase of £833,000 on the original provision for 1952-53 or of £253,000 if the Supplementary Estimate which theDáil has recently passed is taken into account.

On the social welfare side, at very little under £20,000,000, State expenditure has expanded so enormously that not merely is it demanding the £4,754,810 which was provided by Supplementary Estimates in 1952-53, but on top of this again it wants a further £1,708,322 in 1953-54. Put in another way, social welfare expenditure will cost £6,463,132 more in the coming year than was originally provided in 1952-53, i.e., before the additional and compensatory benefits granted under the Social Welfare Acts, 1952, were taken into account.

The principal elements in the increase of £6,463,132 are: Contributory Social Welfare Services, £920,700; Old Age Pensions, £1,207,000; Children's Allowances, £2,794,000; Unemployment Assistance, £340,000; and Widows' and Orphans' Non-Contributory Pensions, £840,000.

One might say here that this £6,463,132 represents performance as against the promise of our predecessors. It will be observed that there has been a reorganisation of the social welfare group of Estimates designed to show clearly the provision for the contributory and non-contributory services. The Social Insurance Estimate covers the contributory services and the Social Assistance Estimate the non-contributory services. Costs of administration of £587,000 are provided for in the Vote for the Office of the Minister for Social Welfare.

The Defence Estimate is up by £1,381,350 compared with the original provision for 1952-53. The increase arises mainly under the heads of Pay (£172,466), Provisions and Allowances in lieu (£179,637), and Defensive Equipment (£949,311). The increase under the two former heads arises mostly from the increase in numbers due to the successful recruiting drive. The increased expenditure on defensive equipment is required to provide the Army with additional and up-to-date equipment without which it could not be maintained as an effective force. Defence is another service for which the original provision for 1952-53 was found to be inadequate with the result,as is well within the recollection of Deputies, that Supplementary Estimates totalling £715,000, mainly for defensive equipment, had to be taken. If allowance is made for the Supplementary Estimates the increase of the Vote as a whole is £666,350.

There are substantial and significant increases on certain items in the Estimate for Agriculture. The amount demanded by the land reclamation scheme, now generally known as the land rehabilitation project, having undergone a transmutation and baptism in the three years 1948 to 1951, is up by no less than £897,304 over the original figure for the current financial year. The figure for ground limestone subsidy at £600,000 is double the original figure in the 1952-53 Estimates, while the provision for advances under the Grain Storage (Loans) Act, 1951, is quadrupled at £200,000.

On the other hand, the non-recurrence of the repayable advances to Comhlucht Siúicre Éireann for the importation of superphosphates and a prospective receipt of £500,000 in repayment of these advances, together with certain substantial reductions under other sub-heads, have made it possible to reduce the Estimate in the first instance by £1,738,920 as compared with the aggregate of £7,264,230 which was voted for this financial year. I mentioned that it has been possible to reduce the Agricultural Estimate in the first instance by almost £1,750,000. A further reduction in the total of the Estimate has been secured since the Estimate was sent for final printing, and as a result of this it will not be necessary for the Dáil to vote the £162,000 in respect of storage charges on butter cold stored to meet next year's winter consumption. Instead this charge will now fall to be met out of the Dairy Produce (Price Stabilisation) Fund which, as older members of the House will recollect, was established under the Act passed in 1933, and was of such material assistance to the dairying industry during the pre-war depression.

There is as I have already mentioned an increase in the demand for the Department of Local Government and an important item contributing to it is the provision of £400,000 for grants to local authorities for the improvement of roads in the Gaeltacht and congested areas. This expenditure which is being undertaken to encourage and develop the tourist industry in these districts will also give considerable employment in them. There is a large increase, to be exact £300,000, in the amount to be provided for grants for the purchase, erection and reconstruction of dwelling houses by private individuals and public utility societies.

As Deputies who were members of the last Dáil will, no doubt, recall, the Transition Development Fund which had been established by the present Minister for External Affairs, my colleague Deputy Aiken, when he was Minister for Finance, was wound up on 31st March, 1951. The undischarged commitments of the fund are, of course, dwindling each year, a fact which is responsible for the decrease of £350,000 in the appropriate sub-head. I mention that and I emphasise it in order that this reduction will not be misrepresented in the manner in which it was misrepresented in this House in the debate on the Vote on Account last year. This decrease of £350,000, arising mainly from the action taken by our predecessors is, of course, much more than counterbalanced by increased State advances and increased subsidies towards housing loan charges. The sub-head, "Grants to Local Authorities under the Local Authorities (Works) Act," is reduced by £250,000, but against this reduction we may set the proposed outlay of £400,000 on Gaeltacht roads and the increase of almost £900,000 as compared with the original Estimate in the provision for land rehabilitation both of which will be supplementary in their effect on employment to the grants under the Local Authorities (Works) Act.

There is an increase on the Vote for Primary Education which is attributable in the main to improved superannuation terms for teachers. The Supplementary Estimate of £167,300 recently taken was mainly for expendi-ture involved in increased benefits for teachers who had already retired. Including the Supplementary Estimate in the calculation, the net increase on the Vote is £177,140. May I appeal to the Chair that, if Deputy Dillon and Deputy Norton want to engage in a conversation, there is a smoke room behind the Division Lobby?

Mr. Norton

That is a typical hooligan's remark by the Minister.

Mr. MacEntee

On the Vote for Lands, the provision is £135,000 greater than the original provision for 1952-53, arising mainly on the improvement of estates, etc. The Forestry Estimate also shows an increase, being £295,100 more than the original Estimate for the current financial year. More land is now being acquired and more employment is being given in looking after existing forests and preparing the ground for new plantings. In that connection, I should like to give the House some very illuminating figures. For the year which ended on the 31st March, 1951, the gross expenditure from the Vote for Forestry amounted to £800,000 approximately. May I repeat that for the year ended on 31st March, 1951, the last year of the Coalition, the gross expenditure for the Vote for Forestry amounted to £800,000 approximately. It is estimated that the corresponding figure for the coming year will be £1,391,050, or almost £600,000 more. It will be noted that I have given figures for gross expenditure. In each year this gross expenditure was reduced by certain Appropriations-in-Aid, these appropriations being almost entirely receipts from forests and saw-mills. In 1950-51 these amounted to £126,000 thus making the net expenditure from the Vote in that year £674,000. For the coming year they are expected to increase to about £170,000, which will leave £1,220,000 as the net amount to be provided out of voted moneys for the forestry services. Thus the net amount which we are asking for forestry in the coming financial year is exactly 84 per cent. greater than in the last year of the preceding Government.

Mr. Morrissey

What about the present year? Why are you skipping that?

Mr. Aiken

He does not like next year's figures.

Mr. MacEntee

The growth in the receipts from State forests and saw-mills is noteworthy and deserves some further elucidation, particularly when we recall that for the year 1939-40, income from these sources amounted only to £17,500. Eight years later, however, in 1947-48, it had increased, almost six-fold, to £99,700; and next year, as I have said, it is expected to be not less than £170,000. I need not remind the Dáil that this substantial and increasing income is being derived from trees and forests planted many years ago under the Fianna Fáil afforestation programme and while we have not, so far, derived a penny-piece from what the Coalition spent on this service I am glad that the Deputies find their record in regard to this service a source of amusement.

General MacEoin

You are talking about sally rods.

Mr. MacEntee

This proves, at any rate——

Mr. Morrissey

Your age is telling on you, I am afraid.

Mr. MacEntee

I hope that the House will take careful note of these figures. They cannot be explained away. They stand there as a justification for the careful, prudent and provident way in which we have attacked the afforestation programme.

Mr. Morrissey

"Attacked" is the word.

Mr. MacEntee

We did not ask the Dáil to provide money which we never intended to spend. We did not ask the Dáil to provide money when we were unable to procure the land. We built up a reserve of plantation land which was there available to maintain a carefully calculated and planned afforestation programme. Unfortunately, that is not the situation which we have inherited.

Coming to the Vote for Industry and Commerce, the progress being made on rural electrification—another Fianna Fáil project—is reflected in the increase of £400,000 in the amount required for subsidy which this year is expected to absorb over £900,000. Asum of £240,000 is being provided under the head of fuel subsidy, compared with the token provision of £5 in 1952-53. This amount is required to cover losses connected with the stocks of coal accumulated by Fuel Importers, Limited. It is proposed to reduce these stocks during the coming financial year.

At first sight, a person looking at the Estimates might think that the provision in the Industry and Commerce Estimates for semi-automatic turf production is less than last year by as much as £239,110. The gross provision for this item, however, has to be considered in relation to the credit item of receipts from sales, and on this basis the reduction is £95,360. I regret that I have to say that turf production by semi-automatic processes has not justified itself, as costs are very high and it is difficult to dispose of the finished product. A less uneconomic method of maintaining and utilising the product of labour on the smaller bogs is to be tried by erecting small turf-driven generating stations at suitable points. This has already been announced, and I understand that the Dáil have approved of the project. The total of the grants for Bord na Móna housing, which shows a decrease of £268,620, is related to the rate of building justifying disbursements of grants on the present statutory basis.

The provision for An Foras Tionscal, which is £150,000 less than for 1952-53, represents merely a more realistic assessment than was possible last year of the amount likely to be spent. It does not represent any change of policy. It merely indicates that experience has taught us that demands which are likely to be made under this sub-head for this purpose are not as great as we had anticipated. The same remark applies to the provision for technical assistance. Provision for expenditure under this heading is now made in the Votes for the Departments sponsoring technical assistance projects, which is a more convenient way of dealing with the matter than having a separate Vote.

I come now to the Vote for Transport and Marine Services. A sum of£1,300,000 was originally provided, as the House knows, for C.I.E. in 1952-53. Unfortunately, this proved inadequate and, as I have already mentioned, further assistance to the extent of £1,100,000 had to be made available. This year we are providing in the Vote a sum of £1,500,000. This is intended as a maximum subvention from public moneys for this undertaking which has drained the Exchequer of millons of pounds over the past few years. I feel that I should refer here to a statement which was made during a recent debate on a Supplementary Estimate by the Minister for Industry and Commerce. He issued a warning against any assumption that there is some bottomless well of Government subsidies which may be drawn upon when wage increases are being sought and being granted. As reported in Volume 136, column 1410, of the Official Report, the Tánaiste said—and it may be well to repeat and emphasise it—that "wage increases or other variations in operating costs would, in future, be offset as far as possible by increases in fares and charges and if these increases in fares and charges should cause a falling-off in traffic that situation will have to be dealt with by a reduction of services and a reduction of services may involve a reduction of staffs." That is a hard economic fact which it is necessary for us who are concerned with this problem to face. As I have said, in fixing this figure of £1,500,000 as the amount of subsidy which C.I.E. may be expected or may be entitled to get this year, we are fixing it, I trust, as a maximum. It will be necessary, therefore, for every person interested in this undertaking to bear that fact in mind when they are making demands or when they are organising and providing services.

I do not propose to say anything about the G.N.R. Company, as the Tánaiste referred to it last week when moving the Supplementary Estimate for the Department of Industry and Commerce. I think the appropriate time for further comment will be when the Bill covering the acquisition comes before the House. It will suffice, I think, to say that the amount provided approximates to the original and supplementary provision for 1952-53 but is.£185,000 more than the original provision alone.

There is a net decrease of £354,700 in the Estimate for the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. This decrease is mainly attributable to reduced expenditure on stores. The revised plans for financing and operating Radio Eireann were announced last November. The Estimate for Wireless Broadcasting reflects these changes. Henceforward, in the normal year, the income of Radio Eireann should cover its expenditure and will be expected to do so. This will not be the case, however, in the coming year mainly because it is proposed to provide new transmitters, which are estimated to cost £115,000, and which, we anticipate, will give a better service to the listening public.

I have already dealt with the Defence Force as a major head of the increased expenditure in 1953-54. There is, however, an increase in the provision for Army Pensions. As will be seen, the bulk of the increase of £291,510 on this Estimate arises on the sub-head for Military Service Pensions, and is due to provision being included conditionally for the increases in pensions which will take place subject to the enactment of the Military Service Pensions (Amendment) Bill.

To conclude this commentary on the Estimates, I should mention that £375,000 is being provided specifically under Vote 67 in the coming year for the development of the tourist industry. This is £140,000 more than last year. In addition, however, to this specific sum of £375,000 there are other provisions in the Estimates which will also materially contribute to the expansion of what is now, after much misrepresentation, acknowledged by all Parties to be at least our second most important industry. I have already referred to the sum of £400,000 which is being made available for the improvement of roads conducive to the development of the tourist industry in the Gaeltacht and congested areas. A sum of £7,550, small, of course, by comparison with the other items, is also being provided out of the Transport and Marine Services Vote for works on railway premises at Cobh to improve accommodationfor tourists entering there, and in addition to what is spent under Vote 67 itself, money will also be spent out of the Vote for Public Works and Buildings on National Monuments, the preservation of which in other countries is regarded as being not merely a patriotic duty but a work which gives an adequate commercial return.

I come now to deal with an aspect of the Estimates which has provoked some controversy in the past. However, the pros and cons of setting apart certain items of expenditure in the Supply Services and dubbing them as capital and proclaiming that they are proper to be met from borrowing, have been sufficiently discussed before this, and I do not intend to enter upon the subject now. I might mention, however, for the information of the House, that the amount provided in 1953-54 for the "capital services" designated as such in 1951-52 is £9,366,000, as against £9,277,000 in 1952-53. The services in question were detailed in the preface to the 1951-52 Volume of Estimates. Now, before I conclude——

General Mulcahy

Does that include the £4,500,000 for hospital buildings?

Mr. MacEntee

No, it does not. At this stage I must emphasise that the Vote on Account refers only to the Supply Services Estimates, and that these do not present a full picture of State expenditure. The account, in fact, can be completed only when the requirements for Central Fund Services and "below the line" issues have been finally ascertained. As is usual, the estimates under these heads will be included in the White Paper of Receipts and Expenditure issued prior to the Financial Statement. The White Paper also, as its title implies, presents estimates of the yield of revenue at existing rates of taxation and of receipts on capital account. This general assessment of next year's finances cannot yet be formulated and it seems to me, therefore, that the time for reviewing the economic and financial background generally and the demands of the Supply Services is in relation to the budgetary proposals for1953-54. I do not think I can be expected at this stage to enlarge on these topics or to defend or announce budgetary policy. I must say, however, that unless present rates of public expenditure are substantially reduced, the present indications are that the problem of next year's budget will be grave and difficult.

Having said that, I am anxious to know what the Dáil is going to do about this matter. To all responsible people the steady increase in the scope and cost of the public services must be a matter of great concern. Year by year the proportion of the national income taken for public services is rising and the proportion that is left to the individuals who produce that income to spend as they desire is decreasing. In this House, particularly in recent years, we have become so accustomed to thinking in terms of millions that an entirely uncritical attitude has developed with regard to proposals for extension of State Services.

General Mulcahy

Tulyar?

Mr. MacEntee

Did I hear someone say "Tulyar"?

General Mulcahy

Yes.

Mr. MacEntee

That is precisely the point I am coming to. Deputies who are most critical of expenditure which will be reproductive and become a source of income to the community are themselves most vociferous in demanding expenditure which will yield no return whatsoever. Expenditure is advocated by them without any genuine attempt to consider the feasibility of raising the money to meet it. Notwithstanding all that has been said by these Deputies on the score of excessive taxation and on the score of the cost of living, I have no doubt that there would be clamant resistance from them to any measures designed to reduce existing services or to estop proposals to increase them. It is inevitable, however, I think, that serious measures will have to be taken to bring State expenditure into line with the capacity and, what is equally important, the willingness of the public to bear thecost and in the coming year this will be the main purpose of the Government. Supply Estimates have now passed the £100,000,000 mark and it is imperative that the rise should be halted. Positive steps will have to be taken to that end but these will require further consideration. In the meantime, however, one thing can be done readily and in this connection I am authorised to say that the Government have decided to adopt the principle of the motion before the Dáil in the name of Deputy Sheldon providing for the appointment of a committee of public expenditure. What will be the activities of the committee will naturally be asked.

Mr. Morrissey

Carrying the baby.

Mr. MacEntee

One can visualise the work of such a committee as that projected by Deputy Sheldon as a continuous operation, taking various sectors of the Estimates in turn and carrying out a detailed inquiry into each one of them, not with the object necessarily of making any report or recommendation within a time limit, but of providing material and conclusions which would be of use in achieving economy in future expenditure and administration. In Britain, experiments in the establishment of parliamentary committees and subcommittees of the kind envisaged by Deputy Sheldon have a history of some 50 years. Not all of these experiments have been successful. Not all of them have been useful. Not all of the committees appointed have been able to do anything significant, but, from 1946 onwards, an Estimates Committee has been functioning in the House of Commons, and it is claimed that it is fulfilling a very useful purpose. The Government, therefore, will, in due course, propose that a committee on similar lines should be set up by Dáil Eireann.

General Mulcahy

Will not Mother England be surprised?

Mr. MacEntee

Of course, I know that Deputy Donnellan has never been interested in economy. We know how much money was spent in a certain constituency in Galway during theperiod when Deputy Donnellan was Parliamentary Secretary.

Mr. Finan

He is not in the House.

General Mulcahy

There is a lot more being spent now.

Mr. MacEntee

And spent usefully, not wastefully. There will be something to show for the expenditure on the roads in the Gaeltacht and congested areas.

General Mulcahy

A few extra Fianna Fáil Deputies.

Mr. MacEntee

There is nothing to show for the money you spent during the period you were dishing out moneys under the Local Authorities (Works) Act. I am sorry. I thought it was Deputy Donnellan who interrupted. I think it was another Clann na Talmhan Deputy.

Mr. Blowick

This is certainly a good Minister for Finance who does not know who is across the House.

Mr. MacEntee

I did not hear that skylark or I would have known who was interrupting. That is a bird whose top notes I know very well.

Mr. Blowick

Let the chief ranger continue.

Mr. MacEntee

I was saying that in due course the Government will ask the Dáil to set up a committee on similar lines to the Estimates Committee which has already been functioning so usefully elsewhere.

Let us be quite clear about this. The usefulness of the proposed committee will be dependent on many factors which only experience will resolve but it is to be hoped, and I think it may be expected, that the real gain from it will be twofold. First, it will serve to focus the attention of Dáil Eireann as a whole upon the importance of achieving economy in public expenditure, that is, in carrying out the policies for the time being in force and, secondly, it will strongly reinforce the responsibility on Departments of ensuring that wasteful administration and unnecessary use of public money will be avoided.

I do not think it would be fair or just if what I said in that latter regard would be considered as reflecting on the existing administration of the Departments. I am perfectly certain that the majority of the officers who are concerned with the direction and administration of these Departments are as zealous and as anxious as any member of Dáil Eireann to ensure that waste will not occur and that extravagance will not prevail. But, Departments grow up over a great number of years; they fall into an accepted way of working and it is difficult often for the higher officers, many of them very hard pressed, to find time to ask themselves: "Is this the best way, is this the best procedure for doing such and such a thing?" They are content, so long as the machine works under them and so long as they get reasonable results, to allow it to continue its traditional way.

The fact that there would be a Committee of the Dáil which would scrutinise the administrative methods of Departments would at least impress the officers with the need to consider whether, after all, because it was done this way 20 years ago or 50 years ago it must continue to be done this way to-day.

This Committee, I should also point out, will not overlap with the work of the Public Accounts Committee. The work of the Public Accounts Committee is a specialised type of work. It is merely concerned to ensure that money expended comes within the ambit of the Vote and has been properly expended in accordance with the expressed policy of Dáil Eireann. If the Comptroller and Auditor-General does not note that there is any doubt about a particular item of expenditure being in accordance with the Vote or coming within the ambit of the Vote it is 100 to one that no member of the Public Accounts Committee will think of asking whether other expenditures have been justifiably incurred in the sense that only as much money as was absolutely necessary to procure the objective aimed at had in fact been expended. Therefore, as I said, I do not think there will be any overlapping between the work of the Committee which Deputy Sheldon proposes andthe existing operations and responsibilities of the Public Accounts Committee but only time will demonstrate that.

I do not think I should sit down without repeating that the volume of Estimates which has been presented within the past few days to the Dáil and to the public must give us all food for thought. We must ask ourselves are we going to be able to continue to raise the necessary revenue to maintain these services at their existing levels. I think we can do that but we can do it only on one condition. We can do it only on the condition that there is increased production in this country, that we produce from our soil and our resources and by the work and labour of our people a sufficient income to enable them not only to maintain but to improve their existing standard of living and to provide for the cost of all these public services.

If we do not secure that increased production then, inevitably, we must reduce the services, because we cannot continue to provide them out of borrowings; we cannot continue to tax the people heavier than the people are prepared to accept willingly. This is a problem which not only this Government has to face, but which must be faced by every Deputy in Dáil Éireann. It is not merely the capacity of the people to pay, but the willingness of the people to pay that counts, and if the ordinary taxpayers of the country begin to manifest unwillingness in this matter, then, of course, the public finances will get into a state of confusion and the public credit will be destroyed, and if the public credit were to be destroyed, it would be no longer possible to maintain the public services at least upon their existing scale.

Mr. J.A. Costello

I move to report progress.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.