I had not intended to speak on this Estimate at this stage but I must confess that I was rather surprised to hear the Minister underlining the desirability of an expansion in the export of manufactured goods. I do not think any sensible man in this country believes that it is humanly possible for our manufacturers, after a very brief experience and with limited mechanical equipment, to compete in a free competitive world market to-day. I was equally surprised to hear Deputy Cosgrave follow the same trend of thought. What I think our manufacturers should aim at, in order to promote economic recovery is to provide, as far as is humanly possible, for our own requirements here first in every sphere. I do not deny for a moment that it might be possible to develop an Irish export trade in specialised lines. In that connection if we can cultivate, or get the American people to cultivate, a taste for Irish whiskey it would be a big step forward. I think that that, too, will require time. People do not develop a taste for whiskey overnight.
Committee On Finance. - Vote 50—Industry and Commerce (Resumed).
Some do.
I should like to inform Deputy Corry that what I state is quite true. I speak from experience, though he may not believe it. If the American people have been accustomed to drinking Scotch whiskey for a number of years, it is not at all likely that they will immediately switch over to Irish whiskey, but I do believe it would be possible, over a long space of time, to get them to develop a taste for Irish whiskey. As Deputy McQuillan has stated in connection with the motion which he intends to move, from every point of view that would be an industry that would be well worth developing. From the point of view of the Irish producer, the barley growers, from the point of view of the employment, although it might not be on a very large scale, and from the point of view of dollar earnings, the export of Irish whiskey could not be estimated too highly.
I think that the first step towards that very desirable achievement would be to try to ascertain what particular brand of whiskey we manufacture here the Americans would find most palatable. To a man who is accustomed to drinking Irish whiskey, Scotch whiskey is not palatable at all. I must say that at the time I drank whiskey it never occurred to me to drink Scotch whiskey if I could get Irish whiskey. First of all, if I am rightly informed Irish whiskey is very much stronger. It is 25 or 24 u.p. and Scotch whiskey is 30 u.p. Therefore the strength of Irish whiskey is very much greater than that of Scotch whiskey. Perhaps the American people are not fond of strong whiskey.
I know that on a very well remembered occasion, when the merits of Irish and Scotch whiskey came up for consideration and discussion outsidethis House and when people on the Continent of Europe got an opportunity of sampling Irish whiskey through the generosity of some of the Irish distillers, frankly they were afraid to take more than half a glass. They felt that they would not be able to take it, and these people could consume a reasonable amount of Scotch whiskey.
The point I am trying to make is that we must try to find out, or somebody on behalf of our export trade must find out, how we can make Irish whiskey palatable to the American people and then try to turn out that whiskey in the largest possible quantity. I know that this would be of the utmost importance to many of my constituents. In the extreme end of the county, for some reason which I cannot explain, we can grow excellent crops of barley and, peculiarly enough, even with the best process of rotation and manurial treatment, we cannot produce good crops of wheat in the same area. The people in that area were very seriously affected last year when they were notified that their contracts were cut by 50 per cent. That is my main reason for entering on that point. But I do say that, while it may be possible to develop our export trade in specialist lines such as whiskey, I do not think it is fair to expect Irish manufacturers to be able to compete with countries which have generations of experience behind them, have the most up-to-date machinery and the best available technicians. We can, however, develop our manufacturing industry here if we try to cater for our own requirements. Anybody who looks at the list of imports furnished month after month must be struck by the enormous amount of money which we pay out for commodities which we could produce ourselves.
In the development of Irish industry I have always believed and stated that we should concentrate on the manufacture of those commodities of which we have the raw material here. To my mind, the only way we can really bring about full employment is if we keepthose employed on the land producing the raw material, the raw material being transported to the factories, turned into the finished article and retailed over the counter.
I think the finest example of a native industry which ought to succeed in this country is the beet industry, where you have farmers' sons employed on the land producing the beet and, in the off-season, where you have other farmers' sons, or perhaps the same farmers' sons, employed in the factory converting that beet into sugar, with your home market to use the finished article. That is one example of an industry which can develop well.
I submit to the Minister for Industry and Commerce and to the Government and whatever Government may come into existence in this country that we should concentrate on the home market, on the development of those industries of which we have the raw material in the country, before we think of capturing an export market in the world as it is to-day. I hope it is possible to achieve it, and I should like to see it a success, but I must confess that I am very sceptical on that point.
It must be very disheartening for the Minister and the Government to realise that the cost of living here is much higher than in practically all countries on the Continent. Out of a list of 14 countries, even with recent adjustments in price index, we are still eight points ahead.
From what is the Deputy quoting?
I am not quoting, as the Minister can see. I am referring to the statistics that were furnished by the O.E.E.C.
When?
Last June. I am sure the Minister is aware of them. Does he dispute them?
I do.
Of course it is understandable and I am sure the Minister will not deny that the withdrawal of the subsidies contributed largelytowards that position. In fact I think that in reply to a parliamentary question, it was stated that the withdrawal of the subsidies alone accounted for a rise of ten points in the cost of living index. But I do not consider that a high cost of living is in itself a disaster. I would not view it in that way provided the citizens had the ability to pay the high prices. For instance, I would not suggest that it would be highly desirable to see in the windows of Dublin shops a loaf of bread at 4d. if a man had only 2d. in his pocket; he is still going to remain hungry, whereas, if a loaf of bread was 1/- and if he had 2/6 in his pocket, he would be far better off. It is the ability to buy the commodity and the facility with which the citizen can purchase it that matters, not the price. But when you have a country with a remarkably high cost of living figure and in that country you have an abnormally high list of unemployed, you always have hardship, because it is bad enough if the pay envelope is not able to purchase the week's requirements, but it is infinitely worse if there is no pay envelope at all or if the State, in an effort to help a citizen to carry on a very unenviable existence has to come to his assistance by way of relief and doles. I do not say that the Government are responsible. I am only mentioning the point so that I might focus attention on it and so that it may be remedied.
There is a situation in this country whereby we have able-bodied men remaining idle daily and weekly when they should be employed on productive work and I emphasise productive work. I do not regard full employment, so popularly referred to now, as the real end. I always think of full productive employment. If it is not productive it is not nationally desirable. You could have men employed digging holes in the road. That was the way they were employed after the Famine of 1847 but that was not going to do this nation any good. If we employ the men on productive work, producing something that the nation requires, then the nation is prosperous. Hand in hand with the development of our own national resources, thereshould be development of State industries that would cater for our needs.
They must produce wealth.
They would produce wealth. If they work they must produce wealth. I know it is quite a common thing to suggest that building is not very productive work but it provides amenities by which the man or the woman who lives in a comfortable house is better able to do a day's work. They are more inclined to do a day's work and they see some reason for doing a day's work. But if they live in a hovel, as many of our citizens do in the cities and in the country even in 1953, notwithstanding the wonderful work that has been done by successive Governments over a long period, that incentive is absent.
Our housing conditions are not yet what they ought to be. We cannot blame ourselves for it. We must not forget, when thinking of national development, that this country was oppressed for 700 years by an alien Government. No attempt was made to develop our resources. In this very city, if the national financial resources were available, we could put every man to work on very necessary work and provide a tunnel for the people to get through in safety by an underground railway, which must come some time.
The traffic in this city is really perilous for the people who have to travel through it. At some time, some Government must face up to the fact that we want an underground railway in this city. If we had the financial resources we could engage our people on that project and thus save valuable human lives.
Who is to prevent you from doing that, Deputy?
Deputy Hickey will not draw me into that eternal problem of credit because I am not able to deal with the problem of credit. I wish I was or that somebody in the country was. Let me say this much to Deputy Hickey—that paper money, credit or anything else he can think of is nosubstitute for production, and without production you have no wealth.
The only thing of value you can have is human labour.
I could sympathise with any Government that has been in existence or that will come into existence here, because I am sure that any sensible Government will naturally, during its term of office, do everything it possibly can to popularise itself. That is human. The more popular they make themselves the better chance they have of remaining in power term after term.
As I was saying, when I was interrupted, we have a very great leeway to make up. For years and years very little national development took place here. Our country was depressed economically and financially. But even if it were not, there was no goodwill or desire to develop the country along national lines. For that reason, we should concentrate on using, as Deputy Hickey put it, man-power in every possible direction.
Naturally, agriculture offers the best field, but for some reason or another our people are not inclined to remain on the land. You could advance many reasons for that and you might not be right in any of them. I have often asked myself what is the cause of that, because I regard life on the land as a very nice life and a healthy one. Rightly or wrongly, there is an impression in the minds of many that the man on the land has to maintain every other stratum of society in the country.
I think a very good argument can be put forward for the boys and particularly for the girls not wanting to live on the land. I think it is in connection with the female that the real problem lies. When she will not remain on the land, all the young farmer can do is to get off the land himself. You will find it very difficult —and Deputy Corry knows this well enough, although he is smiling-to get a girl to marry a farmer to-day. That is true. Perhaps, rural electrification and the development of other socialamenities may lighten the drudgery for the farmer's wife. Modern science may brighten the outlook for those people, but until it does, I am afraid we have got to become accustomed to the idea of the drift from the land.
When they leave the land they do not want to leave the country if they can help it. The first thing they do is to drift into the towns and cities. When I hear people saying that agricultral production is not what it ought to be, I wonder do they realise that year after year the very best manhood of the country is leaving the land and leaving production. Those who remain—and their numbers are diminishing considerably—must work harder to keep production up. It stands to reason that if you have 1,000 people producing a certain amount of stuff and if you reduce that number by 300 the remaining 700 must work much harder than the 1,000 to produce the same.
Major de Valera
But if there is an increase in mechanisation?
I was just coming to that. That is about the only hope this country has.
Major de Valera
That may be one of the difficulties.
There will be snags in it, I know. It will not be possible, with the present drift from the land, to maintain the level of production which would be required to keep a reasonable standard of living and provide an exportable surplus without intensive mechanisation. I want to say, as I said in the other House, that I do not rejoice in the fact that the horse is disappearing from the Irish countryside because I realise the national dangers involved in that. I can visualise the time, either during another emergency or another war, when we will have to produce enormous quantities of food here for our people, and when we might not be able to get the fuel to work mechanised transport.
And a mechanised Army too.
We must remember that we can always get the fuel for the horse. We could provide the grass, the oats and the hay. If we have to depend on a foreign Power to provide the fuel we require to drive the machinery that is to produce our food in an emergency, which everyone knows will come sooner or later, then I think the enemy at the door might be in a position to dictate his terms.
These are things that we cannot close our eyes to. They may be foolish things to say because I know that you cannot put back the hands of the clock and that you cannot stop progress. In my honest opinion, the worst thing that ever came into this country was the motor car, the petrol to drive it, the tyres to put on it and the spare parts, all of which have to be imported. Every penny spent on these things goes out of the country. The position is there now, and I suppose there is no use in talking about it. If one could calculate the amount of money that left the shores of Ireland since the introduction of the motor car, and the sums that have since been spent on spare parts, on oil and rubber for motor cars, I am sure that the total sum would be sufficient to solve all our economic problems here. We should remember these points when talking about mechanised farming.
Some Deputies may think that I am just talking to fill in time. At any rate, I commend these points to the House, not in any political spirit because I know that the difficulties which confront the present Government would confront a Government composed of people over here if it were formed to-morrow. I do not think there is any great difference at all amongst us here. There is no real difference. There cannot be any political difference. We may differ on economic issues, but when dealing with the Vote for the Department of Industry and Commerce, I do not thing there is any necessity for carping or for scoring political points. If we try to represent our views in the best way we can, then that may be of help to whatever Government is in power in examining the situation and in trying to remedy whatever evils exist. I will now giveway to some other Deputy who perhaps may air his point of view better.
I am very grateful indeed to the Deputy. He spoke of agricultural production and bewailed the loss of the horse and the flight from the land. There are a couple of matters that I intend to bring to the notice of the Deputies opposite. The first is that no Government in this country, from any side of this House, so far as I can see, is prepared to pay the man on the land the wage essential to keep him there. We might as well get clear on that issue once and for all. That is one reason why we have farmers bothering their brains every other day looking for mechanised methods of doing the work that is required to be done on the land. At every by-election, you have Deputies of this House shouting about the price of bread, the price of butter and the price of this and that at a time when the wage of agricultural labourers is still roughly only about £4 5s. a week, while men in industry are getting from £7 10s. to £8 a week, and in many cases up to £10 and £11 a week.
The Minister for Industry and Commerce is not responsible for agricultural wages.
I am replying to the statement that was made by the last speaker, and I am giving him the reason why we have mechanisation.
Deputy Finan related that in another way to the Vote.
I will endeavour to relate a number of things to the Vote within the next couple of hours. I should like to deal with the question of whiskey. As far as the members of the agricultural community are concerned, they have very little to thank the distillers for. The distilling industry came out this year with a definite programme which, in my opinion, was a move at sabotage. They reduced their acreage requirements of malting barley by 50 per cent. on a crop the produce of which they will not be putting on the market for another seven years. They do notdeserve any assistance from any Government, and the House should get clear on that.
The distillers of this country this year deliberately reduced their contract acreage by 50 per cent. in the full knowledge that the whiskey to be produced from this year's barley crop would not be put on the market for another seven years. Then we wonder, what is the cause of some of the unemployment that we have. I do not know what political Party was responsible for that or what moves behind the scenes were responsible for that, but the fact is that it happened. I would like to bring that matter to the notice of the Minister for Industry and Commerce and the Minister for Finance if he were here.
He was warned before.
These are the facts and they are undeniable—that there was a deliberate attempt at sabotage this year on the part of the distillers in this country. I do not mind the brewers. They put their product on the market in the following year. I am speaking of the people who will not be putting their product on the market for another seven years. They are the people that we are being asked to break our necks for and to look for a market abroad for them. There are enough Irish people in America to drink all the Irish whiskey that goes in there. They have not developed a taste for Scotch whiskey. I met many of them when they came back here, and they were shouting for "Paddy Flaherty" the moment they landed. They could drink it, too. I move to report progress.