Committee on Finance. - Vote 50—Industry and Commerce (Resumed). – Dáil Éireann (15th Dáil) – Thursday, 21 Jun 1956

Committee on Finance. - Vote 50—Industry and Commerce (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:—

That a sum not exceeding £5,017,170 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1957, for the Salaries and Expenses of the office of the Minister for Industry and Commerce, including certain services administered by that office, and for payment of certain subsidies and sundry Grants-in-Aid.

Mr. Lemass

I move:—

That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration.

Anybody who takes the trouble to grope through the rather sticky mass of verbiage of which the Minister delivered himself last night in the hope of finding some bits and pieces of solid material which could be regarded as parts of a policy related to present national circumstances is likely to go unrewarded. If the Minister, on the completion of his script, had taken a blue pencil and struck out every paragraph that began with such expressions as: "As I said before,""As already announced,""as Deputies know," he would have not merely spared his own voice but saved a lot of time of the Dáil.

In the whole of his statement there was nothing to show any new approach to the functions of the Department of Industry and Commerce or any intention to reassess plans and viewpoints in the light of the deterioration in our national circumstances. Apparently, the Minister is still hoping that some lucky chance will develop, that in one sense or another a wildcat development will strike oil to solve the national difficulties. Every fresh fact concerning the trend of the national affairs which is now coming to light emphasises the need for a reassessment of policies and ideas and a new approach to the national difficulties; and the need is to get that right across the whole board, not merely by the Government but by Deputies in all parts of the House, by business managements and business owners, by financiers, by trades unions, by farmers, by the leaders of every economic group in our community. I think all Deputies must be aware——

Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach (Mr. O'Sullivan)

What did the Deputy say—"all Deputies must be aware"?

Mr. Lemass

I think all Deputies must be aware that public opinion was profoundly moved by the recent census report, by the revelation of the accelerating rate of emigration and the decline in total population in the past five years coming on top of the evidence of the general deterioration of the national position detailed by the Minister for Finance in his Budget statement.

It is encouraging to see that public opinion is moving in the right direction, towards the realisation that prosperity is something that people have to work for, and is not merely something to wish for, or vote for. There is a prospect now that we may move out of the era of "bread and dole" politics. There is a chance of doing so now, if we take it. People are asking what they can do, as individuals, to help to put the position right again and they are looking for leadership to the Dáil. That is the place where they naturally expect to find it. With the right kind of leadership, the people are capable of the effort which is required in our present circumstances, but they do not want clichés or mealy-mouthed exhortations. They want specific proposals that the average man can understand and help to make operative.

I do not know if Deputies opposite yet appreciate the extent of the damage to public morale which they did by the campaign they chose to conduct prior to the election of 1954. They preached to the people that national prosperity and progress were things they could get by merely voting for them, that there was an easy way of achieving these things. Even though the public now understand that that campaign was fallacious and dishonest, there is still a lingering hope among many people that prosperity is to be found in the plans or programmes of some Party, that there is an easy way out. I do not believe there is an easy way out.

Mr. M.P. Murphy

You hope that there is not an easy way out.

Mr. Lemass

It is not a question of hope. In my view, any politician who now goes among the people talking about lower prices, lower taxation, and better times for all will be met with a stony silence. The people will not listen to that nonsense any more. If we are to find a way out of this situation, we need intelligence and foresight, sweat and sacrifice. We have no desire in this Party ever again to become the Government of the country on the basis of public expectation that we have some plan, or programme or policy which will offer an easy solution of our national difficulties without any effort on the part of the public. We believe we know the road. We think it is a hard road. We want the people to know that it is likely to be a hard road, but we believe that if the road is properly mapped for them, and if the objectives are properly outlined for them, they can be induced to take it, provided that the effort to sell them the idea of easy times without any exertion on their part is finally abandoned.

The Minister said here yesterday that there was an upward trend recorded in our industrial production last year. I do not know if it is generally accepted that we must rely on the development of industry, in the main, to increase the number of jobs in the country, to reduce unemployment and to check emigration. I know that the Minister for Industry and Commerce said something like that last year, but when I expressed the same view in relation to certain proposals which I publicised, there were many Deputies opposite who decided to misrepresent me for the purpose of suggesting that I was animated by a completely urban outlook and that I was indifferent to, or ignorant of, the possibilities of agricultural development.

I do not know if there is anybody who believes that we can step up the level of production to the degree which is required, without achieving a very considerable expansion in industrial production. The problem before the Dáil and the Government is how that is to be done. Last year, according to the index of industrial production, industrial output increased by 3 per cent. I might well question the validity of that figure, but I do not propose to do so. According to the figures which were given by the Minister for Industry and Commerce last night, employment in industry increased last year by 1,000. According to my calculations it would need 15,000 new jobs per year in industry to prevent the continuing loss of our natural population increase through emigration. The natural population increase is somewhere about 28,000 a year. Obviously, we would desire to see conditions existing in this country, in which every man and woman born into it, could hope to find the opportunity of a livelihood here. In my view, the contribution which industry has to make to this problem is to expand at a rate which will mean 15,000 new jobs per year. That is the rate of expansion needed—about 15 times what was achieved in 1955.

From 1949 to 1954, the average annual rate of growth of industrial production was about 6 per cent. and the average number of additional workers put into employment in industry each year was about 3,000. During the whole of that period, industrial production in other European countries increased on an average by about 8 per cent. per year. We started our industrial development a long way behind most other countries in Europe. There was a time, before the war, when we thought we had a good prospect of catching up. Now it is quite clear that we are falling further behind.

What are we going to do about it? No doubt Deputies expected the Minister to answer that question. I do not believe there is any simple answer to it. Any effective policy must manifest itself in every branch of Government activity; and it is not a matter for the Government alone. No plan, or scheme, or device, of any Government, could, by itself, bring about that great increase in industrial activity which we must have. Any course that is proposed by any Government must have the support, based on understanding, of industrial managements, trade unions, investors and bankers and must also have the support of every other section in the country which can in any way influence public opinion.

The Minister, in his speech last evening and on other occasions, indicated that he was relying to a very great extent upon the prospect of inducing foreign capital and foreign industrial direction into this country to help in that process. I have in the past expressed criticism of the Minister's observations in that connection. I thought that the importance of the part which foreign capital could play in Irish industrial development was being over-emphasised, that he was merely adding further support to this fallacy that there is an easy solution, a solution which does not involve any sustained effort on our own part. I was anxious to discourage the growth of any belief that foreigners were going to come in to solve our problems for us and that we had nothing to do but sit back and cheer them on. But I feel, because of the criticisms I expressed then, that my position in that regard was to some extent misunderstood.

I, as Minister, frequently expressed, here and elsewhere, our desire to bring in foreign capital and foreign technical aid to help in our industrial development when they brought with them something which we had not got or could not get from our own resources, either in export trade or in the development of new techniques. But the Minister yesterday gave us a picture of groups of foreign industrialists in Belgium, in Holland, in America and in Germany sitting around in consultation with the representatives of the Industrial Development Authority, or with himself, eager to hear about the tremendous opportunities that exist in this country for new industrial development. I do not believe that is a true picture.

I do not believe that foreign industrialists can be attracted into this country by any process of sending Government delegations to meet them and I am not at all sure, from some indications that I have received, that approaching them in that way is doing more harm than good. It is my conviction that foreign industrialists can be attracted into this country to assist in our expansion here only if they can be shown that our native industrialists are prospering. I have had conversations with people who are engaged in industry elsewhere, people whom, I thought, might become interested in industrial possibilities here, with commercial representatives of foreign Governments and other people who were in a position to express views upon the likelihood of this effort to bring in foreign industrialists into Ireland succeeding. I found that there were quite a number of objections being raised by them, objections which they thought were likely to operate in the minds of foreign business owners to discourage them from attempting to come in here.

They referred to our system of price control. They referred to our profit control. They referred to excessive taxation; they referred also to what is I think a mistaken belief, but nevertheless one which exists in the minds of these people, namely, that Irish industrial development is in some way hampered and hamstrung by the restrictive practices of trade unions. I believe that if we are to get any expansion of industry, on the scale we need through the introduction of foreign capital and foreign management, we will have to remove from the minds of these people the feeling that their development here will be prejudiced by any of these devices. We have got to take chances.

In the circumstances that now exist we cannot afford to be timorous in our approach to these problems. We have got to assure them by the arrangements that we make in Government, by the attitude of the trade union leaders, by the attitude of those who are regarded as the spokesmen of existing Irish manufacturers, that they will have here the opportunities they would expect to find in their own countries. In every other country industry is expanding. There is scope for the investment of surplus capital. There is room for the employment of available technicians which will prove far more attractive to those who control these concerns than will the opportunities we are now offering in Ireland.

If we are to get them in to give us the type of development we cannot get through our own efforts, then we have got to make it clear to them that this is a land of opportunity, a land in which they will be given the scope to develop on the scale upon which we would like to see them develop. In view of the rather unexpected statements that were made to me by some of these foreign industrialists that restrictive practices in trade unions are rampant and will naturally impede any industrial expansion, it is important that the responsible spokesmen of the trade union movement should cooperate to dispel that atmosphere. If we do not succeed in so altering circumstances here that we will give a real impetus to industrial expansion, whether by native effort or by foreign capital, then it is inevitable that we will continue to fall further behind.

It is still true, in my opinion, that by far the greater part of any future development that may occur in Irish industry will come as a result of native enterprise; and, whether or not that native enterprise is linked with foreign technical aid, the aim of the Government, of any Government that wants to get the right kind of results, must be to give native enterprise the encouragement and the help it needs. I expressed views on this subject during the debate on the Finance Bill. I summarised my own experience of efforts to get into export trade certain firms that I thought had potentialities in that sphere. I found that the main difficulties and objections were threefold: first of all, there was the difficulty of getting the capital needed for the expansion of their activities; secondly, there was perhaps an undue apprehension of the difficulties of getting into external markets and a fear that the attempt to do so would involve the destruction of their whole existing enterprise; thirdly, there was the feeling that the profits that could be earned in competitive international trade were not attractive enough to justify the additional investment and the risk involved.

I made certain proposals which I thought should be considered. Other proposals can be put forward, but immediate steps must be taken in three directions: first of all, by increasing the resources and amending to some extent the functions of the Industrial Credit Corporation; secondly, by adopting the recommendations of the Commission on Emigration concerning the setting up of an export corporation; thirdly, by adopting the proposals submitted to the Committee on Industrial Taxation by the Irish Exporters' Association regarding the relief of income-tax on profits earned in export business.

Now, there are theoretical objections to every one of those courses. It can be argued that it is not the function of the Government to find capital for private industrial development; that there are non-governmental institutions which should function in that field; that the development of exports can best be done by individual firms establishing contacts with foreign markets and not operating through any official agencies and that all income derived from any source should be subject to equal taxation. In our circumstances we cannot afford to allow these theoretical considerations to deter us from adopting the practical measures which seem to be required, and immediately required, to get forthwith the forward move that we must have.

This country has accepted under the charter of the United Nations an obligation to pursue a full employment policy. It has also accepted obligations of that character under the resolutions and covenants of the O.E.E.C. I do not know if Ministers regard the obligations accepted through our membership of both these bodies as of no great importance, or even if they understand what a full employment policy means. Some time ago I had the duty of publicising certain proposals for a full employment policy on behalf of my Party. These proposals represented an attempt, based upon the information regarding the national position which was available in mid-1955, to sketch in broad outline a policy for action designed to produce in a reasonable time a full employment situation and to maintain it thereafter.

I will be the first to admit that these proposals now require re-examination. They represented an attempt to adapt to the circumstances of this country principles of policy which are internationally known and have indeed been applied successfully in other countries. We know that there has been a deterioration in the circumstances since. The increase in the adverse trade balance, the contraction of the external reserves of the banks, and other changes require that these proposals should be re-examined in regard to their immediate practicability. It may be that we will have to set our targets at a lower level or seek to achieve them over a longer period of time than I had in mind when speaking last year.

While the proposals received considerable notice in the Press and produced a great deal of valuable and constructive comment, the response from Ministers was extraordinary. One or two Ministers contented themselves by saying that they were impracticable, without producing a single argument to justify that conclusion. Other Ministers were merely concerned to misrepresent their nature for Party political purposes.

One very serious comment on the principles underlying the proposals was made very recently by a senior civil servant in a paper read at the Statistical Society of Ireland. With the views expressed in that paper I am not in any fundamental disagreement. It was argued that our economy is not sufficiently self-contained to ensure that an increase in investment as was proposed, an increase in investment to be financed otherwise than from current savings, would stimulate production, stimulate investment in productive activities to the extent that was assumed. It was argued that the proposals might be effective in what was described as a more isolated economy than exists here and that in our circumstances the increase in total investment contemplated would be more likely to be expressed in increased imports, which would both negative the boost in the level of economic activity which the increase might otherwise produce and, by extending the external trade deficit, undermine public confidence.

I concede at once that financial measures alone are not likely to be effective in bringing about the improvement in our circumstances to which the proposals were aimed and in producing the pressure for the use of idle resources which is desired. Other steps may be needed to prevent the loss of this pressure and to get the results needed. The aim must be to produce a tide of savings here seeking investment which cannot find an outlet anywhere except in Irish production. Capital will always find employment somewhere, and the resources which are thrown up by the Irish economy—the increased resources which would result from the State investment programme proposed—must be forced to find an outlet in private productive activity here. It will not be easy to get that done but I am convinced it can be done. While the process is beginning it may be necessary to take exceptional measures to stop the leaks through which the force of the pressure might be reduced.

It was argued also that proximity to Britain and the British economy, to which Irish workers as well as Irish money are free to move and where there is full employment—indeed overfull employment at present and an unsatisfied demand for capital—will encourage emigration no matter what we may do here; that indeed proposals for a full employment policy cannot achieve results in checking emigration unless they also contemplate the continuous uplifting of the standard of living of our people in line with Great Britain; that in practical terms our conditions of employment, our rates of wages and other factors of interest to workers must continue to be the same here as in Great Britain, otherwise the mere creation of additional jobs will not check emigration.

I indicated in the proposals which I outlined last year, and with which I agree fully still, that we cannot achieve these targets at present unless there is general agreement that the aim of full employment is, for the present, to take precedence over every other aim, including the aim of raising the standard of living of our people, and unless everybody who can influence decisions in that regard is prepared to accept that and to relate his own policies to that aim. There is probably nothing that we can do now which will stop many of the young men and women around 20, 21 or 22 years of age, who have already taken the decision to emigrate, from leaving. But we must think in terms of plans which will ensure that the boys and girls now leaving school, the boys and girls of 14, 15 or 16, will have a different outlook on leaving and will see in this country opportunities of a reasonable living, of having the type of living they may desire. We must secure that, when the time comes, they will take different decisions from those which have been taken by their older brothers and sisters.

It was argued also in this paper to which I referred that recent Irish experience gives no assurance that the proposals which were outlined will be successful. There can be no assurance but unless better proposals are made by somebody other than those put forward on behalf of this Party they hold the field. The worst decision we can take is to do nothing and let the future shape itself. We must either plan to go forward or we will certainly go backward.

I have referred already to the revelations in the recent preliminary census report and the indications that this country during the five years from 1951 to 1956 had a net loss of population of 65,700 people. All the evidence available to us suggests that the rate of emigration is accelerating and that the greater part of the loss of population occurred during the latter part of that five year period. The report on vital statistics published by the Central Statistics Office in 1952 estimated the loss of population between 1951 and 1952 at 11,500. The report for 1953—it was only published in the past few days and is the most recent of these reports—estimated the loss of population between 1952 and 1953 at 4,000.

It is over two years since the report of the Commission on Population and Emigration was published. Shortly after the report was published I asked the Taoiseach if the Government had come to any conclusions on the recommendations in that report. He said that the recommendations were being circulated to the various Departments for consideration by them and that the Government's decision thereon would be announced later. That was two years ago and it is the last we heard of it. There has not been a reference to the report by any member of the Government since for the purpose of giving a view upon the recommendations therein.

All those recommendations were considered in detail by the Fianna Fáil Party. We do not agree with all of them. We think some of them foolish but others of them are worth consideration and implementation. I think that the Dáil should be given an opportunity soon of hearing from the Government its decisions upon these recommendations and of discussing these decisions.

The Minister referred in his speech yesterday to mining ventures and he obviously is hoping that many of the exploratory activities which are now proceeding in various parts of the country will reveal the existence of important mineral resources. That is a hope which we will all share. When the announcement of the arrangements made by the Government for the development of the Avoca deposits was made, I expressed some doubts about them. I did so primarily because the development at Avoca was one that I had been instrumental in starting, and when I started it I had hoped that the ultimate outcome would be somewhat different from the arrangements contemplated.

I had a view, which was I see expressed by Mr. Michael Gannon, the organiser of the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union to the Avoca branch of that union, to the men who will be employed in that operation. He said, according to a report in the Wicklow People on the 14th May:—

"While, therefore, we should welcome technical and other assistance from friendly nations in developing our industries and national resources, we should take care to ensure that the control and administration of such industries and resources do not pass from the hands of the Irish people."

I think, however, that in all fairness I must say that if a decision had been taken to develop the mineral resources of Avoca by an Irish company, whether State-owned or privately owned, it is unlikely that the Irish company would have proceeded on the scale on which the Canadian company is apparently intending to work.

It was a matter of very great satisfaction to me personally when early in 1954 the Board of Mianraí Teoranta reported that the exploration work which had been started away back in 1947 had at long last revealed the existence of minerals at Avoca on a scale which justified their commercial exploitation, and no matter what method was adopted to develop them the fact that that stage had been reached was a matter upon which we all congratulated ourselves.

In case there is any possibility of misunderstanding—maybe there is not —but to remove it if there is, I want to say that we are prepared to give the company which is now working at Avoca the fullest backing in ensuring the success of their venture. Those associated with it need have no apprehension whatever that the agreement which they made with the present Government will be altered in a letter by any subsequent Government. I do not believe it is desirable that changes in arrangements with private concerns should follow changes of Government.

Mr. M.P. Murphy

You need have no worries in that respect.

Mr. Lemass

It is not I who am worried. According to the speech made by the Minister yesterday and according to various statements which appeared recently in the Press, prospecting leases have been given to a number of other concerns associated with Canadian capital. The Minister mentioned leases in Castleblayney and Meath and apparently a lease over a very wide area has been given or promised for an area in County Cork. I understand that another Canadian group has got a prospecting lease for a wide area in the County Waterford.

Very many optimistic accounts of the prospects in these areas have been publicised. They certainly have been publicised here. I do not know if they have been publicised elsewhere. It is, I think, unusual in this country for any firm entering on a business venture to publish optimistic accounts of its prospects until it has commenced work or until it can support these accounts with detailed facts and statistics. So far as I know, these optimistic accounts of the prospects of the areas have preceded any attempt to explore them—before any drill was put into the ground, much less before any substantial area of mineralised rock had been located. That may be normal practice in other countries: I do not know. I certainly hope that all the glowing expectations which have been publicised will be realised. I know, however, that the shares of Irish Copper Mines, Limited, were last week offered on the Dublin Stock Exchange for the first time at a premium of 150 per cent. The dollar shares were offered at 2 dollars, 50 cents. Those are shares in an undertaking which the Minister said yesterday will not be in production until the end of 1957.

I think it is desirable that the Minister should—in regard to developments of that kind, where he is giving leases to prospect State minerals and where attempts will obviously be made at some stage to raise capital abroad— exercise some control over the publicity associated with these developments. I have no desire to discourage anybody from engaging in these explorations. I have no objection whatever to foreign capital being utilised or to foreign firms interesting themselves in this work. The position in Allihies, Beaupark, Castleblayney and Bonmahon is completely different from the position at Avoca. In Avoca, there was a mine already there. There was development in which the State had already put £500,000. No such situation exists in these other areas and there must be a considerable amount of speculative development.

I am aware that some time ago—the Minister referred to this in his speech yesterday—the Government of which I was a member decided to expend money upon the detailed exploration of three mineralised areas in this country as a preliminary to the full and thorough exploration of all our mineral resources. We employed international experts of the highest repute to advise the Government as to the three areas in the country that offered the best prospects. These experts had available to them all the information in the offices of the Geological Survey and were given a list of the areas in the country where minerals had ever been worked. They spent some time examining them. They recommended that the three most likely prospects were those mentioned by the Minister yesterday. They did not include any of the areas in respect of those for which leases are now being given. That may mean anything or nothing. However, I think it would justify the Minister's ensuring that statements published regarding these minerals are accurate in every detail and can be confirmed by the officers of his Department to whom reports on the progress of prospecting must, under the Act, regularly be submitted.

I am sorry to learn of the Government's decision to put Mianraí Teoranta in cold storage. I still think that the best way of exploring the commercial prospects of State-owned minerals is by State enterprise. If that is not going to be the policy I would still urge that where Irish private interests with the necessary technical resources and capital are prepared to do the exploration work they should get preference over foreigners. There is at least one instance of where that does not appear to have happened, though I admit there may be an explanation. The Minister may have given a binding promise to the Canadian group concerned before the Irish group appeared on the scene. However, I would urge that it should be regarded as a prime consideration of policy to endeavour to keep the development of any minerals we may have in Irish hands if it can be done either through the extension of the activities of Mianraí Teoranta or by encouraging Irish private enterprise into that field.

Mr. M.P. Murphy

You had your chance to do that for 20 years and very little was done in that time.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order!

Mr. Lemass

The Minister referred to the position regarding the oil refinery. I am sure that what he said came as a considerable shock to many Deputies if not as a surprise to some of us. On the 10th February, 1955, the Minister informed the Dáil that an agreement had been reached in principle with the Caltex, Esso and Shell interests to start up a company for the operation of a jointly-owned refinery in this country. Indeed, it could be said that agreement in principle had been reached on that matter more than 12 months previously. It had been conveyed informally to me. The actual formal communication of the decision probably took place after my time.

That report of Ceimicí Teoranta was accepted in principle by the Government of which I was a member and we voted them a sum of £15,000 to complete their investigation as to the actual gasification process that was to be used, as to the exact site of the factory and for the preparation of final plans. Presumably, that is the report which the Minister has received and I think he should make it known to the Dáil whether in fact that project is going to proceed or not. In that connection, I have seen reports of a new development which involves the production of nitrogenous fertilisers from the waste products of oil refineries and it is claimed that by this new process nitrogenous fertilisers can be produced much more cheaply than by any other means. If that is so, if examination substantiates these claims, and if there is to be a refinery here, then there may be some justification for re-examining those proposals but it is an issue upon which the Dáil is entitled to know what is happening and what is the view of the Government.

The Minister skipped very briefly over the issue of prices. Last year on the Estimate he said that it was his intention to introduce permanent legislation for the control of prices as soon as possible. In the course of the debate I reminded him that there was a draft Bill in the Department which he could produce forthwith and thus avoid unnecessary labour on his part and unnecessary delays so far as action in that direction was concerned, and he interjected the following:—

"It is not going to be a Fianna Fáil Bill. Of course the Bill you left is a Fianna Fáil Bill. I am not interested in that. You will see a Bill from this Government in due course but it will not be a Fianna Fáil Bill."

Then the Minister came to this year and in the debate on the Supplies and Services Bill he told us we were not going to see a Bill at all and he gave——

Mr. Norton

That is not so, of course. Quote me on the Supplies and Services Bill.

Mr. Lemass

Certainly. Surely the Minister said that?

Mr. Norton

Quote me then. This is the usual chancing of your arm of course.

Mr. Lemass

What the Minister said is reported in Volume 155 and the quotation I am going to give now is at column 216. Having announced that he had decided not to go on with the Bill the Minister gave this reason for his decision:—

"It would be most unfortunate if any price control arrangements became, at the outset, associated in the public mind with the rising costs inseparable from a general inflationary situation..."

First he had decided there was to be a Bill and the only thing he knew about it was that it was not going to be a Fianna Fáil Bill. Then he decided he was not going to have a Bill and his reason for doing so was that whatever Bill was introduced would not be effective in preventing rises in costs and would be associated in the public mind with failure. That may be a good reason or a bad reason but apparently he thinks now that the arrangements which we operated before 1954 are as suitable as could be devised. Personally I do not think they are and I had intended to change them.

The Minister said last night, and other Ministers have repeatedly stated this year, that prices rose last year because of international factors which were incapable of being controlled. That argument will not stand up for one moment under examination. I think it is desirable that that contention should be discredited because, again, it is merely a carry-over of the 1954 election campaign. No doubt there is a desire for Ministers to excuse themselves, but it is wrong to attempt to excuse themselves by misleading the public and it is misleading the public to induce them to believe now that the rises in prices which have occurred in the past year were due solely to international factors. The facts show that to a far greater extent that rise in prices occurred because of internal factors. Why should not the public be told the truth? This practice of protecting the people against the realities of life and against knowledge of the consequences of their own actions is surely undesirable.

Since February, 1955—and that is not going back to the time when the Minister took office—the consumer price index shows an increase in retail prices averaging 6.5 per cent. That is the increase which the Minister is trying to lead the House and the public to believe is due mainly, if not solely, to international factors. We can check it. If it is due solely to international factors then one would expect to find a corresponding increase in the price index for the materials used in manufacturing industry or capital goods acquired by industry.

What are the facts? In 1955, the price index for materials imported for use in industry rose by 1.2 per cent. over 1954. The price index for capital goods required by industry rose in 1955 by 3 per cent. over 1954. The price index for all imports, whether materials for industry, capital goods, or goods for consumption, showed an increase of 2 per cent. in 1955 over 1954.

There is another aspect of prices of which the Dáil and the public should be aware. The increase in retail prices during that period was 6.5 per cent.; the increase in wholesale prices was only 3 per cent. Between February, 1955, and February of this year, the index number for retail food prices showed an increase of 4 per cent. During the same period, the index number for agricultural prices—the prices paid to farmers for the goods sold in the shops—fell by 6½ per cent. Relate all these statistics, one to the other, and they show without doubt that the main factors causing this upsurge in retail prices in this country were internal. Increased production costs on the one hand, and increased distribution costs on the other, were far more important than any international changes that may have taken place.

People were at one time told they could vote themselves lower prices; they are now being told the reverse by some Ministers and they have not all begun to believe it yet. I think it is time that all of us—Deputies on all sides of this House, trade union leaders, everybody, whose opinions can influence the course of events—agreed that we should tell the truth about the factors that influence prices. All of us should tell the workers and the farmers that no increase in wages or in farm prices will be of any real benefit to them, that it must, in due course, be negatived by rising prices, higher taxation and unemployment, unless it is associated with increased productivity.

The Minister is doing the country a real disservice in trying to mislead the public into this fallacious idea that the rise in prices could not be influenced by anything that could take place here, that it is due only to international causes. That is untrue, and if we are to have any practical approach to the solution of our national difficulties, any serious effort to prevent a continuing rise in prices, the first thing to do is to tell the public the truth.

I shall refer now to the E.S.B. During the course of the year, a member of the Government alleged that the E.S.B. deliberately misled me, as Minister for Industry and Commerce, on a matter on which the Government have the final responsibility for policy—that is to say, the adequacy of the board's charges to yield sufficient revenue to meet their outlay. On another occasion, the Minister for Industry and Commerce implied that I was misled by inaccurate information supplied by the E.S.B. regarding the capital programme needed to keep production capacity ahead of the demand for current. If that allegation—that I was deliberately misled by the board—is true, it is a serious matter. If the Government believe the allegation is true and intend to do nothing about it, it is a much more serious matter.

The Minister for Industry and Commerce, or any other member of the Government, can have no really reliable source of information concerning any statutory undertaking of that kind except from the board of directors he appoints in charge of it, and if that board of directors deliberately mislead him by inaccurate information or doctored accounts or wrong forecasts, then it is certain serious mistakes will be made, and if they go further, and mislead the Dáil and the public by repeating these inaccurate forecasts and doctored accounts in their published reports to the Dáil, it is obvious something must be done about it.

When the Electricity (Supply) (Amendment) Bill was being debated here last year, the Minister for Industry and Commerce said, as reported at Volume 152, column 88 of the Official Report:—

"...what they said to you when you were in office is a matter between you and them."

The Minister for Industry and Commerce was addressing me at that time. That is a completely mistaken viewpoint. The Minister for Industry and Commerce is an institution, and what the E.S.B. said to the Minister for Industry and Commerce, whoever he may be, is the concern of every Minister for Industry and Commerce, of the Dáil and the public, and if they said something to me as Minister, which was not correct, with intent deliberately to mislead me, then there is only one possible remedy—to clear out from that board those responsible for the deception.

Just to quote precisely what was said, I would refer the House to a statement by the Attorney-General in this House when he said:—

"I do not know whether I should say this in praise of them, but the fact is the E.S.B. poked their finger in Deputy Lemass's eye in 1953 when they got him to increase the charge."

That is the quotation which is the basis of my assertion that the Government appear to believe that I, as Minister for Industry and Commerce, was deliberately misled by the board. In 1953, the board came to me with their accounts for the previous year, accounts audited and checked, and if there was any doctoring of these accounts, the auditors must have been in on the job. These accounts showed there was a deficit in that year of £488,000.

On the strength of these accounts and of what the board said as to the cause of the deficit, I authorised them to increase their charges. Because of that increase and other factors, the board's revenue rose in the following year—1953-54—and showed a surplus of £233,000. By way of explanation of that surplus, the board, in their report to the House for that year, said that expenditure on fuel was less than in the previous year by £537,508, mainly because of more favourable weather conditions.

At that stage, there was a change of Government. Whether the Minister thinks the board is trying to deceive him or not, I do not know, but a board that would deceive one Minister for political or other reasons would not hesitate to do it with another. We know that in the following year the board's accounts showed the substantial surplus of £883,000. Again, they explained that surplus by referring to the favourable weather conditions which involved a further reduction in their total expenditure on fuel. Indeed, the suggestion is that, between 1952 and 1954, weather conditions were such that the whole of the board's outlay on fuel fell by nearly £1,000,000, notwithstanding the fact that the prices of coal and other fuels were up. On the basis of these figures, I cannot be certain that I was not misled, that they did not poke their finger in my eye.

It seems clear from the accounts that if the board sold current in 1954 at the same average price per unit as they realised in 1952-53, the diminution in their revenue would not have been more than £150,000—well within their surplus. The consumers of electricity are entitled to an explanation. Did the board give me, as alleged, misleading accounts and forecasts to get an increase in the charges of electricity to which the circumstances did not entitle them or, if not, what is the explanation? We know that the Government, seeing that surplus in the E.S.B. revenue, decided to raid it for the benefit of the Exchequer and, by altering the whole basis of the rural electrification scheme, to cut down on the surplus. I told the Dáil at the time that the effect of the change in the rural electrification scheme would be to produce a deficit on the board's revenue of £1,000,000 a year. The board have apparently found that I was correct and the Minister was wrong; at least the Press now report that the board is seeking an increase in its charges of 10 per cent. which will bring in an additional £1,000,000 per year.

When I made that forecast and tried to justify it by reference to facts in the board's accounts, the Minister scoffed at the idea. It was only in July last that this matter was being discussed, and I am quoting from Volume 152, column 90, of the Official Debates of 5th July, 1955, where, when I said the board would have to increase its charges because of the change in the rural electrification scheme, the Minister said:—

"They will not. I am putting on record now that they will not go up. I have said already that they will not go up. There is no justification for their going up."

Later on, at column 96, the Minister said:—

"Take note of what I am saying to-day: Next year the board will have another surplus..."

Did they have another surplus? The Minister, no doubt, had to make the best case he could to the Dáil in justification of a decision forced on him by the Minister for Finance, but it is a matter of which the Deputies sitting behind the Minister should take note, that that case was a "phoney" case and that they voted for an alteration in the rural electrification scheme on the basis of wrong information supplied to them by the Minister.

The board's application for an increase in charges is being sent to the Prices Advisory Body. I do not know if the House thinks that the personnel of the Prices Advisory Body is such that they are more competent to advise the Government on matters affecting the E.S.B. than the members of the E.S.B. itself appointed by the Government. Is there not something ridiculous in having one body of people, set up by the Government, investigating the accuracy of the information supplied to the Government by another body set up in the same way? Again, there has been a remarkable change of mind on the part of the Minister in that regard. Last year, he did not agree that the proposals of the board should be investigated by the Prices Advisory Body. He said at column 98 in the same volume:—

"I think it would be a bad thing for the Minister to have the power to intervene in fixing the charges because that is capable of manipulation in times of difficulty or times of emergency for a political Party. I think it is better for the board to fix it."

Why was the board not allowed to fix the charges? The Minister, having changed his mind in that regard, decided he would require the cover of a report from the Prices Advisory Body because this is a time of emergency for a political Party.

Let us turn from the question of charges to the question of the generating programme. The Minister gave some additional information yesterday to justify the decision that has been taken to cut down the E.S.B.'s development programme. He referred to the White Paper which was published in connection with the Bill I submitted to the Dáil in March, 1954, a White Paper which contained estimates of the growth of the demand for current and indicated the proposals of the board to build up generating capacity to meet that demand. The Minister told us last year that the estimate for 1955-56 which was published in that paper was corrected downward by the board in January, 1955, and again corrected downward by the board later in the year. He alleged that the estimate of the growth in demand which appeared in that White Paper was not based upon information given to me by the E.S.B. That is not true. I do not know if the Minister really believed that when he said it, but it is important he should know it is not true. I know of no reason why the board should have attempted to mislead me in that regard by furnishing false estimates.

The Minister said the board has installed generating capacity in excess of what is required to produce the current that it could sell to-day or in the immediate future. As it stands, that statement is meaningless. The board must have installed generating capacity in excess of the immediate demand for current. It would be an impossible situation if the maintenance of the supply of current depended upon the 24-hour operation of every generating unit in the country, so that the need to shut off one unit would also involve an obligation to shut off power in some district. There must be generating capacity in excess of the immediate demand.

Furthermore, the generating capacity of the board is based upon various estimates. About 40 per cent. of its installed capacity is based upon water and the output capacity of a hydro-unit is calculated upon the average rainfall experience. In a wet year, its output will be higher; in a dry year, its output will be lower. It is obviously prudent, therefore, to keep stand-by plant to supplement the production of hydro-stations in a dry year when they cannot work to their average capacity. Indeed, having regard to the debates that were conducted in the Dáil when the Shannon scheme was being launched and the calculations that were then made as to the amount of stand-by plant required it would seem that in 1954 the board were not providing for sufficient stand-by plant because of the favourable weather experience which they had in 1953 and which continued in 1954.

The Minister, on the last occasion he spoke here, made his estimate of the growth of demand and justified it by reference to the chief mechanical engineer of the board. The chief mechanical engineer is a man for whom I have the highest regard as a mechanical engineer, but, in this matter of estimating the growth in the demand for current, the opinion of the chief mechanical engineer or any other engineer is no better than that of any other person who examines the trend of national affairs. It is not better than the Minister's or mine, or that of any other Deputy in this House.

The demand for current depends upon the level of economic activity and social conditions prevailing in the country. Why the chief mechanical engineer should be regarded as having some special competence to forecast the development of economic activity generally or changes in social conditions, I do not know, but in making his forecast in 1954, he had before him the same information as I have, the same information as other Deputies have, and it is this: since 1946, the average annual increase in sales of current was 12 per cent. In each year, the sales of current by the E.S.B. exceeded the sales in the previous year by an average of 12 per cent. Indeed, the rate of increase in sales was accelerating. Taking the past three years for which we have the information—1953, 1954 and 1955—the average rate of increase in the demand would be nearer to 13 per cent.

Mr. Norton

In the last three years?

Mr. Lemass

1953, 1954 and 1955; that is, the financial years ending in March, 1953, 1954 and 1955. That increase in the demand for current here is in line with the increase recorded in other countries. In the report of O.E.E.C., it was shown that in all Western European countries over the same period, production of power increased annually at an average rate of 13 per cent. The programme of 1954 was drawn up on the assumption that the demand for current would grow at a rate of 13 per cent. per year and it provided for keeping the board's capacity merely one step ahead of demand. Indeed, towards the end of the period, it would not have been possible unless additional stations were provided which were not planned in 1954.

In the White Paper published in 1954, the additional capacity over and above the actual amount planned appears opposite the heading "Other Schemes". We are told by the Minister that last year the increase in the demand fell as low as eight per cent. If that is so, then something very serious has happened. Indeed, I could think of no fact that could be produced which would be a more striking condemnation of the Government's administration than that. Here we had evidence of national progress involving increased demands for electrical power, which is one of the surest indications of progress, at a rate of 12 per cent. per year right from the end of the war and 13 per cent. in the last three years before the change of Government. It is now down to 8 per cent. Apparently the Government is accepting that the deterioration in the rate of national progress will continue because it is now cutting down the new generating programme of the E.S.B., apparently on the assumption that the growth in demand will remain at the rate of 8 per cent. per annum.

Mr. Norton

The reason was that the board did not believe the economics of your 1953-54 scheme. They thought the Deputy had gone hay-wire in his anticipations.

If it is true that the rate of increase fell to 8 per cent. last year, does that mean that we must accept that it will never go back to the old rate? Are we going to put brakes on national progress to ensure that it will not expand to a higher rate?

I have asked the Minister to tell us what has happened and, to spur him on, I will give another quotation from the speech he made here in July last. It is from Volume 152, column 1957:—

"The truth of the matter is that you cannot keep the E.S.B. from making progress. It is making progress more rapidly than ever before."

Someone succeeded in keeping the E.S.B. from making progress. Was it the Minister? If the explanation is that the Government cannot see their way to financing E.S.B. development at the rate contemplated in 1954 and for that reason want to cut it down, let them say so. That is something one can understand, but to proceed on the assumption that the whole rate of development is going to fall off and to decide, in consequence, that the plans will be so clipped and limited that it can never be expanded again is a completely wrong decision.

Mr. Norton

The revision is the board's decision. It is not being bulldozed as it was in 1953.

Mr. Lemass

I will deal with the one matter on which I bulldozed the board as the Minister describes. I want to suggest that, in view of the important issue involved here and the desirability of getting the whole E.S.B. programme removed from the domain of political controversy, a committee of the Dáil should be set up to examine all aspects of the board's administration and policy, and particularly its programme for expanding generating capacity to meet expected demands, and its ideas for the financing of these expansions. I think it would be a useful development if such a committee were brought into being, so that this matter could be examined in a more detailed way than is possible by debates in the House.

The Minister has said that certain bogs being developed by Bord na Móna for the E.S.B. will not now be required because of the curtailment of the programme. It is proposed to use them for the extension of the manufacture of briquettes. I think it is quite clear that with the recent substantial increases in the prices of other fuels the extension of briquette manufacture is now an economic proposition. It was considered on many occasions in the past and it did not seem possible to bring about an increase in the production of briquettes at a price which would make them saleable, having regard to the prevailing prices of other fuels. That situation has changed and the decision to increase production of briquettes is one of which I strongly approve. Briquettes produced from any new plant will cost a great deal more than those now being produced at Lullymore. That plant was acquired from a firm which was in liquidation, at a very cheap price. The whole development occurred when money was worth a great deal more than what it is to-day. The total productive assets at Lullymore stand in their books at £86,000. These are producing 40,000 tons of briquettes each year. The board contemplates spending £900,000 on a new plant plus whatever may be charged against them in respect of bog development, to produce 100,000 tons of briquettes each year. Capital per production unit for the new plant will be not less than five times the capital invested at Lullymore. I am quite certain that with present costs for other solid fuels, briquettes can be produced and sold at a price which will make them attractive to the public. There is an unsatisfied demand for them at present.

The Minister said I bulldozed the board in 1953. I did. I had brought to my attention in that year the worsening economic conditions in certain areas along the western seaboard. I visited these areas and discussed their problems with local people. They all said that conditions had been reasonably good in all these areas during the war, when there was a market for the turf, and they said that, if only something could be done to revive the market for the turf, many of the economic problems of these areas would be relieved. I gave consideration to the possibility of reviving a market for the turf and decided that it was practicable to build small power stations to be fuelled by hand-won turf, which would not be economic units in any sense of the term, but which could, nevertheless, serve a usefull purpose and the existence of which would increase the level of prosperity in a notable degree over wide areas of the country. I decided that we should go ahead and build these stations and I got approval from the Government.

I discussed the matter with the E.S.B. and they were completely against it. They did not want to have anything to do with it. I could understand their point of view. These stations had not any place in their whole generating programme. They were not to be established as economic units to work at a profit. They were a social scheme with which the E.S.B. thought it should have nothing to do. While I tried to press them to do it, because it was the more convenient method of getting it done, once they persisted in their objection, I indicated that I would not go further and would set up another organisation to establish and work these stations, and merely require the E.S.B. to buy the current they produced. At that stage, the E.S.B. changed its mind and decided that it would prefer to operate the stations itself, rather than have another electricity authority brought into being, and I could understand their point of view there also.

These stations were designed only for the purpose of securing a market for hand-won turf. The Minister talked about my having bullied the E.S.B. into establishing an electricity generating station they did not need. Let us get this on some basis of reality. Assuming that these stations are worked to full capacity, that they are amply supplied with fuel and can be maintained at their fullest technical efficiency, the total capacity of all four stations added together will be less than 1 per cent. of the present installed capacity of the E.S.B. These four stations added together, even if worked continuously to full capacity, will add less to the total output of the E.S.B. than a single unit in any other station. They will have between them one-third of the capacity of the new station which is being built at Ferbane and they will have between them one-third of the capacity of the new station which is being built in Mayo. In relation to the board's generation needs, they do not count at all. Whether any one of these stations does or does not produce electricity in any year will not matter a rap to the E.S.B. They were not started primarily for the purpose of producing electricity. They were established for the purpose of providing a market for fuel, for hand-won turf, in the areas in which they are located. May I say that I am glad to see what I believe is a change of attitude by the board towards these stations?

The Minister spoke here about only 300 tons of turf being offered at Screebe. I believe that at some stage after the change of Government the E.S.B. went out to kill these stations, to persuade the Minister that it was undesirable to proceed with them and to get him to drop the whole idea. Why did they get only 300 tons of turf? What price did they offer?—30/- a ton, and the turf was to be produced, although the money which was voted to build the roads into the bog so that the turf could be brought out had not been spent. That is all changed now. They are now advertising for turf at 50/- and the £200,000 that we had allocated from the National Development Fund for the construction of the roads apparently is going to be spent. At least, surveyors are there surveying the roads and making arrangements for their construction.

I hope that local private effort will produce in each of these areas enough turf to keep the stations working continuously. It is not essential that they should, but, if they do, there will be an influx of new money into these areas which cannot but benefit everybody living in them.

There are just a few other matters to which I want to refer briefly. The Minister indicated that the negotiations with Britain concerning the revision of the 1946 Air Agreement have concluded and that the terms of the agreement will be announced soon. I will reserve my comments upon that agreement until we see it. I hope it will provide a satisfactory basis for the emergence of Aer Lingus again as a wholly Irish-owned organisation. I could not understand the Minister's reference to the relationship between that agreement and the construction of an airport at Cork. The agreement concerns the operation of air services and I am quite certain there will be no clause in it which will make provision for the operation of air services without an airport. There cannot be air services in Cork, no matter who provides them, unless there is an airport there. There is no justification whatever for the delay in proceeding with the planning of that airport because of these negotiations.

The Minister, no doubt, has had brought to his attention the problems that are likely to arise in connection with Shannon Airport, in view of recent developments in aeronautics, the construction of bigger planes operating with jet engines which need longer runways from which to take off safely. I do not know if any decisions have been made in that regard. These planes will not be in operation until 1959 or 1960, but if there is any need for a decision to make an extension at Shannon to receive them, it will want to be made fairly soon, because the completion of the work there will take some time also.

I am sure everybody has been exceedingly disappointed by the reports of the unsatisfactory experience of C.I.E. in this year. Last year, the Minister was apparently optimistic that the board would be able to get through the year without any increase in its losses. In fact, he said, when introducing the Estimate last year, that the prospects for complete solvency of C.I.E. within a few years appeared to be good. Accordingly, he said, the Government did not think it necessary to make any provision for a subsidy to C.I.E. to meet the operating losses.

Since then, the whole situation has undergone a very serious change for the worse. During the year, many increases in C.I.E. charges were announced. The charges on the country bus services were increased by 10 per cent., the charges in the city bus services by 5 per cent. and the rail fares and both rail and road freight charges were also increased by 10 per cent. I can, without any difficulty, imagine the manner in which the Minister would have made the welkin ring, lifted the roof off the Dáil, with his denunciations of those increases, if it had been my responsibility to authorise them.

Notwithstanding these very substantial increases in charges, the board's losses for the year appear likely to be almost double what they were for the previous year. I do not believe it is possible for C.I.E. to keep on pushing up its charges, without expecting a loss of revenue by so doing. Their transport charges must be very nearly at the limit at which any new increase would mean a substantial loss in business. I do not know if the Minister has any modifications to announce in the plans for the reorganisation and modernisation of C.I.E., but the Minister for Finance has told me that the board will need £5,000,000 of additional capital in this year. At that rate, the State will have almost £28,000,000 in capital invested in that undertaking, so that it is perfectly clear that we cannot afford to allow it to get into the condition into which it appears to be now moving. I see that there is to be a meeting between the board of management and the trade unions. What the outcome will be, I do not know and what the purpose is I can only guess.

I was very gratified to hear the Minister recording the progress made during the past year by Aer Lingus and by Irish Shipping, Limited. All these State enterprises, with the starting of which I was associated, such as Aer Lingus, Irish Shipping, Bord na Móna, Irish Sugar and Irish Steel, are all very successful enterprises in every sense of the term, and particularly in regard to their capacity to earn profits. There was a time when there were many people looking down their noses at these publicly-owned undertakings. I do not know how these people feel to-day when it is acknowledged that they are the most successful in the country. There was none of them brought into operation without opposition from some section in the Dáil and that adds to my gratification, that their successful operation has now to be conceded by everyone.

This success was obtained at a time when most privately-owned enterprises were making very little progress. All the profits of these enterprises, Irish Shipping, Aer Lingus, Irish Steel and the others, are being ploughed back into the development of the undertakings. They represent national assets, the value of which cannot be discounted and which will continue to grow. I have no desire to indicate any change in my view that, for our industrial development, we must continue to place our main reliance on private enterprise, but, if circumstances make it necessary for us to resort to public enterprise in other fields, it is a good thing to know from our experience that we can hope to make a success of them. I do not think that fact can be too widely publicised. The public capital investment in all these undertakings is not merely safe, but is being substantially repaid. There is no cost to the taxpayer. They are paying the interest charges on the money advanced to them and, over and above that, they are earning profits which are going back into the extension of the undertakings. That is a most satisfactory position and I should like to have had the pleasure of announcing it.

Mr. M.P. Murphy

I think it is indeed a regrettable fact that the previous speaker was not imbued with the same wisdom as he now displays at the time when he was Minister for Industry and Commerce. He has given us a long disseratation on the many ills which this country labours under at the present time. One would infer from his statement that, if he had control of the Department of Industry and Commerce, all these ills would be removed overnight. The people of this country must bear in mind that Deputy Lemass, on several occasions, got an opportunity from them to take over responsibility for the Department of Industry and Commerce. Speaking as a rural Deputy, I must say that he did nothing to improve the industrial position in rural Ireland. I think it is a great blessing for us, in areas like West Cork, that he is now on the opposite side of this House and I hope that he will long remain there.

Industrial development in this country is a very important matter. We have had discussions here year after year on this Vote; we have had many plans put forward which, we were told, would cure in a very short time all the defects this country suffers from, as far as development in the provincial towns and rural areas is concerned. No such improvement is evident. I am of the opinion that there is too much centralisation of industry in this country.

Notice taken that 20 Deputies were not present; House counted, and 20 Deputies being present,

Mr. M.P. Murphy

I think that one of the main disadvantages we labour under at the present time is that we have too much centralisation of industry. The population of this country being not more than 2,750,000, everybody knows that Dublin is top-heavy, having almost 700,000 of that population. To a lesser extent, the same can be said of the smaller cities, Cork, Waterford, Limerick and so on. Successive Governments seem to cater for these areas in particular and completely forget the many smaller provincial towns and rural centres all over the country. It is no wonder that we have a declining population in these provincial towns and rural centres. We all know that Dublin, Cork, Waterford and the other larger centres cannot cater for any more people coming in from country districts to seek employment. Any man that comes from West Cork to seek employment in Dublin, Cork or Limerick knows that it is impossible to get it.

First of all, he cannot obtain work unless he is accepted as a member by one or other of the trade unions and the trade unions cannot at the present time find sufficient work for their present membership. It is, therefore, impossible for them to cater for the country people who come into the cities and towns with a view to finding employment. That being so, there is an obligation on the Minister for Industry and Commerce and his Department to give more attention than they are giving at the moment to the provincial towns and rural centres.

Another disadvantageous factor so far as these centres are concerned is that we have too many bodies catering for industrial development. We have Gaeltacht Services. We have the Department of Industry and Commerce. We have the Board of Works. We have six or seven State concerns all more or less working independently of one another and without any attempt at co-ordination, all supposedly charged with looking after the congested areas along the western seaboard and the depressed areas generally. It would be much better if there were only one body, call it what you like, looking after these areas and charged with their industrial development. When a rural Deputy makes representations to the Department he is told that the particular matter in which he is interested is dealt with by Gaeltacht Services, that some other matter comes within the scope of the Undeveloped Areas Act and so on and so forth. It is, indeed, difficult for him on some occasions to find out what particular Department or section of the Department is dealing with the problem that confronts him.

I can assure the Minister that the people in these areas are not too satisfied with the position that prevails and they are looking to him to put an end to the policy pursued by the Fianna Fáil Government and to adopt some more definite measures to ensure that some industrial development is centred in these areas. It may be said that I am somewhat too extreme on this subject and that my adverse comments on the lack of industrial development in rural Ireland are somewhat exaggerated. I come from a constituency in which we have five towns—Bantry, Skibbereen, Clonakilty, Dunmanway and Castletownbere—and not one penny has been put into the industrial development of any of these towns. The stock answer of the Department is that, if some feasible proposal is put up, they are prepared to consider it; that is the farthest any Deputy from West Cork has ever got with the Department.

That position should not obtain. As I have already said on other debates here, we contribute by way of taxation to the promotion and sheltering of industries in other parts of the country, particularly in the bigger cities and towns. Are we not then entitled to some help from taxation by way of return? When it is difficult, as it is almost impossible in most places, to get local people with the necessary knowledge to draw up suitable proposals for the establishment of an industry, then there is an obligation on the State to step in and do it for them.

The State has set up a number of State-sponsored bodies, such as the E.S.B., Bord na Móna, C.I.E., and so forth. On the same principle, why can the State not come along to towns like Skibbereen, Bandon and Dunmanway, or anywhere else, and establish some industry suitable to the needs of the particular locality? Successive Governments have ignored these towns completely. Ministers and ex-Ministers have commented on the unfortunate position which will evolve as a result of the reduction in our population through emigration. What other alternative is there for the people?

Down in West Cork the population is declining day by day. Unless something is done and unless we get some help—we may possibly get it in the not too distant future from an outside source—the population will continue to decline. Many young fellows in their twenties approach me from all parts of West Cork asking me to get them some employment, if not in West Cork, then in some other part of the country; their main desire is to remain at home in Ireland. Now, it is quite impossible for me, save in exceptional cases, to find employment for them. What is the alternative? A man must be satisfied with probably one week's work in five and the remaining four weeks on the dole. It is better for our young people in West Cork and in the congested areas generally to take the first boat to England where they will not have to degrade themselves by drawing public assistance and where they will be paid in return for their labour. That is a more advisable course for these young people and I have consistently advised, and will persistently advise, them to take that course until such time as work is provided for them at home.

The biggest difficulty with which we find ourselves confronted in these congested districts is the fact that there is no employment for our young people. In those circumstances these young people have no alternative, if they stay at home, but to draw unemployment assistance. Now, while I approve of unemployment assistance, I think it is a most unfortunate situation that our young people have no other alternative. It is unfortunate that men in their twenties should have to have recourse to unemployment assistance to keep body and sould together. It is both degrading and demoralising. Successive Governments have done very little, so far as we in West Cork are concerned, to ameliorate that situation.

One of our main hopes of retrieving the position and providing useful employment for our people is not unfortunately emanating from Irish people or from an Irish Government. It is coming in from outside. We are looking forward now hopefully to this new mineral development taking place in West Cork and we hope that it will, in time, expand to such a degree that it will provide full employment over a wide area for all our young people. I refer to the exploration which is at present taking place in the Allihies-Castletownbere district and in the Berehaven Peninsula. We hope other work of a similar nature will eventuate in the not too distant future in the Skibbereen, Schull and Goleen areas.

If I remember correctly, in my contribution to this Estimate 12 months ago I stated, as a representative of the people and a member of this House, that I would welcome any people in here who were prepared to lay out money and provide employment in areas in which successive native Governments have failed to provide it. Deputy Lemass took exception—I believe I am interpreting him correctly —to foreign capital and foreign capitalists coming in here; he is very doubtful of their integrity and believes more or less that they are coming in not for the benefit of the people but for their own benefit. I hope to elaborate further on that so as to remove any misunderstanding.

I think a typical example is provided by our position down in West Cork. For years, the representatives of the people there have been asking the Government for help in this matter, but unfortunately no help has been forthcoming. More than 30 years have passed, and now we have these outside people coming along. I am glad that the present Minister for Industry and Commerce has focused attention in other countries on our potentialities here. I believe his visits abroad to the Continent and the United States of America have already done a certain amount of good and will do more good in the future, because he and his advisers brought attention to bear on the potentialities of this country and in particular the potentialities of these minerals upon which some areas depend so much for their prosperity.

Criticism has been levelled at the Minister because he has given these people, Canadians and others, concessions they would not have been given were Fianna Fáil in power. These people, whether they come from Canada or any place else, are business people; and if they put money into a business here, they expect to reap a reasonable harvest and a reasonable profit. I believe they are entitled to that profit. If these Canadians come down to West Cork and make money out of the West Cork mines, I say good luck to them so long as they give us decent and fair employment at reasonable rates of remuneration.

At the present time, these mines are no advantage to the areas in which they are located; they might as well not exist at all. We have heard about this Irish organisation, Mianraí Teoranta. I am glad it is winding up its affairs because it had not a very spectacular record during its existence. I am glad the total voted for it this year is only a £10-note, though I think that is too much. All business concerns, whether they be Irish or anything else, expect a return for putting endeavour, technical knowledge, money and so forth into an industry. They expect to get a reasonable return and we must agree that these people coming from foreign lands have a right to expect such a return. We must agree that they are likewise entitled to these concessions in respect of development work we did not take up ourselves, whether it be through lack of funds, technical knowledge or through lack of courage in meeting the problems of mineral development. It may be said that it is too "chancy" a business for Irish people, but if that is so, they should let it to others who are prepared to take the risk.

I read in the Cork Examiner some three or four weeks ago that the chairman of the Federation of Cork Manufacturers had something to say about these people coming in from Canada. Apparently, he felt very worried about them and that they may have an adverse effect on the Irish economy. With all due respect to the chairman of the Federation of Cork Manufacturers, he is a man, I feel, reasonably well off and fairly well sheltered. He has a nice yearly income; we do not grudge it to him. But I must think of the hundreds of people down in West Cork who are not in the favourable position of the chairman of the Federation of Cork Manufacturers. They have not big salaries coming in to them every month.

I do not want to dwell any further on that line, except to compliment the Minister for Industry and Commerce on giving those people concessions of that sort. It is an advantage that Deputy Norton is Minister for Industry and Commerce because the former Minister, Deputy Lemass, who spoke at length here this morning, stated that there was no hope of ever developing these particular mines, that their development was completely out of the question. Whether it was this organisation, Mianraí Teoranta, that gave him that information or not, I do not know.

There is another matter which I know is a difficult problem. Townspeople are very interested to know could any lead be given by the Government in this matter. In the towns I have already mentioned we have no industrial employment, and we have these towns surrounded by co-operative creameries—Dairy Disposal Board creameries. The ultimate result is that many people from the country, farmers and others, who formerly did spend money in these towns and helped to keep them going, do not now need to call at these towns except on rare occasions. Business in these rural towns is declining because of a number of factors. Even some of the townspeople themselves contribute to it because in many towns there is a system whereby some of the bigger shopkeepers get travelling shops and move out into the country to the detriment of their smaller competitors.

This is a rather complicated matter because creameries play an important rôle in the community. The question whether or not they should be delegated to deal with creamery produce seems a contentious matter. Possibly, there is a great deal to be said in favour of it and against it. The farmers, when they go to the creamery in the morning, are anxious to get their requirements for the day or a couple of days.

It is quite evident that these creameries, travelling shops and so on have brought about a big reduction in trade in the towns, so much so that small shopkeepers can now be regarded as being among the poorest sections of the community. That is how I find them in Cork and in many other towns in the country. They have to keep up a reasonable show and do the best they can for their families. They have their commitments in the shape of rates and taxes and it is becoming increasingly difficult for them to meet these.

I mention this matter in the hope that the Department may examine the general position which obtains in several of our towns, with a view to thinking up some scheme or system whereby these towns could be helped; otherwise, I am doubtful if these people can continue, because it appears their financial position is worsening steadily. I have been asked by a number of them to mention their position to the responsible Minister in the hope of finding some way in which they could be helped.

The Estimate covers a wide field and I feel the majority of the Deputies, if not all, would like to make a contribution to this important Estimate. As the Parliamentary Secretary, Deputy Crotty, is present, I should like to mention the question of the E.S.B. charges. The E.S.B. is a national concern, a body set up by State funds and with the backing of the State. Undoubtedly, it is doing magnificient work in many fields. However, the Constitution of the State is drawn up to guarantee equal rights to all citizens, and I am afraid these equal rights are not available to people who have occasion to seek an extension of the electric current. As the Parliamentary Secretary is aware, the people who suffer from the present regulations drawn up by the E.S.B. in connection with the extension of current to particular houses or districts are those people who live in the more remote districts. If, as has happened recently, a number of these people make applications to the E.S.B. for current they are informed that the current will be made available, but in addition to paying the ordinary charge, they will have to pay a special charge. The result is that in the populous centres and in the areas contiguous to towns and villages every citizen gets his current at the ordinary charge but in the more remote districts that is not so.

The answer I will get will possibly be that this is due to the cost of taking the current to the remote districts. Not only have the people to pay the ordinary charge, but in many cases they pay a prohibitive special charge as well. That should not be. The E.S.B. is a State-sponsored body and every citizen is entitled to get current on equal terms. If people live in a rather isolated district, it is unfair to ask them to pay not only the ordinary charge but a special charge as well.

It will be said that the board makes these charges only because they incur certain expenditure in extending the service. I believe that should be a general charge and that all users of the E.S.B. should pay portion of it If that were done, the percentage increase in the present charges would be insignificant. The special charge is levied on a small section of the people and it is bound to hit them hard. I hope the Minister, in conjunction with his Parliamentary Secretary, will look into that matter, so that when this Estimate comes forward again in 12 months' time, this grievance will have been removed. Undoubtedly, it is a strong source of annoyance to many people.

The only other thing I should like to mention on this Estimate is the development of our tourist industry. There is not very much to be said about it. I think the Minister is meeting his obligations in that respect in a very reasonable way. We hope that, as a result of his efforts, more tourists will come to this country and bring more money, which will be of marked advantage to us.

In conclusion, I think it is only right for me to pay tribute to the Minister and his Parliamentary Secretary for the admirable work they have done in that Department for the past 12 months. I had occasion to approach both of them and I got complete satisfaction. I want to thank them in particular for the great interest they took in our mineral development work in West Cork and for all the help they gave me in dealing with these outside concerns to promote that work. I wish them every success in continuing that work for the coming year.

Mr. Calleary

The people of my area will read with dismay the statement of the Minister, and, on their behalf, I wish to enter a strong protest against the action of the Minister regarding the proposed slowing down of the work on the power station at Bellacorick. Let us hope that this is only a slowing down, as the Minister stated, and not a complete closing down.

The people of North Mayo recollect that the Minister for Industry and Commerce visited North Mayo a year ago. This visit was not as well advertised as his visit to the United States. He went to North Mayo, dined at Bellacorick, rushed to Bangor, passed through Glenamoy. He did not even slow down in Glenamoy. He did not meet any worker there or any official. When his tour was finished, the announcement came that the grass meal company was to be closed down. This experiment was not to get a chance and was to be finished. That was one of the first acts that resulted from the Minister's tour of North Mayo.

Next, we got the information that it was proposed to merge the Bangor generating station with the Bellacorick generating station. No reasons were given. We were told that it would be advantageous to transport the milled peat from Bangor to Bellacorick. That, in my opinion, was wrong, as the distance and the terrain are not suitable to allow for the economical transportation of the milled peat and that is the position so far as the station at Bangor is concerned.

We have now heard that the demand for electricity is declining and that it is proposed to slow down the expansion programme of the E.S.B. This slowing-down again refers to the Bellacorick generating station in North Mayo. The output from some of the bogs earmarked for power purposes, will not be required as was originally contemplated. This means that the slowing-down process is put into operation in North Mayo.

What has caused the decline in the demand for electricity and has any other country in the world shown this tendency of a decline in the demand for electricity? Has electricity become too dear or are our people beginning to be afraid to use it? Have they so little confidence in the Government that they are afraid to use this current, which should be the cheapest power available? I do not know what is the position or why this should happen, but it means that we in North Mayo are getting the full blast of the inefficiency of the present Coalition Government. We are the people who are suffering. We are of the opinion that it is not just the decline in the demand for electricity that has caused North Mayo to be singled out. We believe that the Government want to save money in connection with long-term developments and that North Mayo is the area that is being selected to effect these economies.

I wondered, listening to the Minister yesterday, if I was dreaming when I heard him talk about the increased number of persons employed in the various works. I look around me in North Mayo and what do I see? I have never seen unemployment so rampant. I have never seen emigration at such a high peak. I have not seen any scheme which has resulted in the employment of any men in the North Mayo area since the Coalition Government came into office.

I should like the Minister to tell us when he is replying, how far the scheme for the starting of an industry in Ballina has progressed. During the Kerry by-election, the Taoiseach talked of it and of the advantages it would bring to Ballina. We have heard nothing about it since. I wonder if that scheme has been shelved? I hope it has not. I trust the Minister will tell this House what the prospects are of Ballina getting this industry.

I should be very interested to hear from the Minister any information he may have regarding mineral exploration and development in County Mayo and whether or not he has any information on the proposed activities of any group from Canada or elsewhere in County Mayo. I hope the Minister will let us have any information he may have in that regard as we in North Mayo feel we have fared very badly under the present Minister for Industry and Commerce. North Mayo is one of the poorest areas in Ireland. From time immemorial, people have had to migrate from that area in order to get employment and whole families have sometimes had to cross the water to earn a livelihood for themselves. The farms there are the smallest in Ireland. We feel that the present Minister has let us down badly. I hope that every Deputy from North Mayo will protest against the slowing-down which has been evident so far as the Bellacorick generating station is concerned and that they will demand that the Minister will carry out the work as it was originally proposed.

Mr. MacCarthy

We were speaking yesterday of the transfer of money for capital development which might be available for the improvement of county roads. To-day we have introduced a new note concerning the development of towns and rural districts in order to stem the tide of emigration, to provide employment in those districts and to restore confidence amongst the rising generation as to the prospects of employment in their own country.

Deputy Lemass gave a very striking indication of the manner in which he, in his day, inspired the industries in the western part of our country and in the boglands by putting up alternatives to the E.S.B. or notifying them that another organisation would be established to provide industries which would use the natural resources of these areas. It was possible to do that with a big State company, but it is not easy nor, indeed, might it be considered desirable to take the same course with private enterprise because their natural tendency is to establish their industries near big centres of population where they will have available to them sources of supply and consumption, where their transport costs will be lower and where there are better prospects, in their opinion, for the success of their industry. Nevertheless, to my mind it is the function of the I.D.A. to follow the same course as Deputy Lemass took when he insisted on the establishment of E.S.B. stations to use native fuel from the peatlands of Ireland for the generation of electrical power.

Last year I travelled in the West of Ireland. I visited Rosmuck, where Pádraig Pearse went to improve his knowledge of the native language. One of the things which gave me the greatest pleasure there last year was to see some of these stations being erected and the activity that was going on at those places as well as to see the immense area of bogland from which the fuel was to be provided.

Deputy Lemass said here to-day that the money for the making of roads into those bogs was not used and that, in consequence, there was not the general development that could have taken place there while the station was being erected. Evidently the station will be erected before the roads are developed and, in consequence, before sufficient turf is available. Even though there are acres and acres of turf there, the roads have not been made to enable it to be cut.

In many areas in our constituencies we see evidence of the advisability and the desirability of local development where we have natural resources such as turf. Imported fuels are becoming so expensive now that our people will turn back to what can be got in their own country. That will have a very desirable effect in contributing towards a changing trend in the adverse balance of payments, so that our own development of our national resources may improve generally the financial position of the country.

Following the trend that Deputy Lemass had in mind at that time in bringing into this House and in having passed by this House the Undeveloped Areas Act, we have in various parts of the country towns that became depressed through the change-over particularly in big centres where there was a large armed force in years gone by. The change-over has hit these towns very seriously and the establishment of industries in order to provide employment in those areas is most desirable. There is provision under the Undeveloped Areas Act for the Minister by Order to extend its advantage to some of these towns. Suggestions have been made about industries that it may be possible to establish, for example, in towns like Kinsale and Bandon and in many other that could be mentioned in that respect, where most of the men have gone abroad to find work in other lands and where only the womenfold keep the home fires burning.

That aspect of industry is very desirable, and to my mind where technical knowledge is not available, the vocational schools in these districts should be used in one way or another to provide for the anticipated development. Our native Government over the years has had very difficult problems to face; it had war conditions over a long period and it was thrown back on its own resources to a great extent to provide its own fuel and food. It is a source of regret to many of us to find that when the war is over the self-sufficiency that was then developed is now largely being forgotten and we are again importing foodstuffs to the extent of millions of pounds' worth which could be produced here if economic prices were offered for their production. That particular trend of developing everything which can be developed within our own shores, even without great profit or any return of that kind, should be encouraged, once it gives employment and keeps our people working and gives them some confidence that by increased production they will improve the economic and financial position of their own nation. We would then make some progress, but if the trend is for emigration to get worse and worse every day with producers and consumers going abroad from their own land, we will reach a stage of stagnation where only an economic revolution can remedy the position.

Some criticism has been made of the fact that our mineral resources have not been developed as they should. It takes considerable time to make the necessary surveys and carry out the exploration. A great deal of technical skill is required and special types of machinery are necessary in order to do that, but at the same time, if we examine the various districts in the country where copper, lead or other minerals of that kind have been mined in the past, surely we will find that these resources in most cases have not been exhausted. Economic difficulties of various kinds brought about the cessation of that mining in the past. For example, if we read Lewis's Survey which, I think, was carried out about ten or 12 years before the famine period we find that 400 men were engaged in mining lead at a place called Ringabella in my constituency not very far from Kinsale. Whether or not it was financial conditions or something of that kind that caused these mines to cease operating, the mines are still there. I brought the matter to the attention of the Minister and the Department several times but I do not know whether any steps have been taken to explore the possibilities there.

While people were able to get these minerals abroad in greater quantities they were not prepared to turn here to develop our resources or even to consider them, but when world supplies are running out elsewhere or perhaps when development in other lands is retarded, they are turning to us here and there is some hope for the development of these mines which have been closed for years. A place did not get the name "Silvermines" for nothing. Even the place names themselves indicate what was characteristic of a particular area in the past. If we have developed our manufacturing industry, to the extent that it is able to go ahead now of its own momentum, we ought to turn our attention towards what is under the soil of this country, as well as developing our agricultural productivity to the utmost and trying to obtain markets for it, thus giving employment in transport. We should turn to our mineral resources, as is being done, and see what can be done with them. Certainly the minerals are there in various parts of the country and new sources of wealth may be discovered and the general productivity of the country built up in a manner which will redound to our national advantage.

The crying need, I think, is that emigration must be stemmed and more employment given. There are many opportunities here for the achievement of both, even though it does require a lot of organisation and all that goes with that. Considerable organisation, for example, resulted in the establishment of the E.S.B. hydro-electric stations. When such stations are completed in places like Inniscarra, the possibility of providing alternative employment for the workers in the locality should be closely examined. The development authority should, for example, see whether or not this is a favourable time to start work on the Cork airport in order to absorb the labour that will become unemployed when the Inniscarra station is finished. The type of work would be the same; the workers on that station have become skilled in concrete materials. These men should be put to work on the construction of the runways for Cork airport.

As I have said, the greatest cause of emigration is the lack of continuity of employment. When schemes finish in a certain area, there is nothing left there for men to provide for their families in a decent and reasonable way. People do not want to rely on the dole. The sooner we do something to provide that continuity of employment the better for the country. The Minister mentioned the possibility of giving employment in the improvement of the appearance of our towns and cities by the removal of derelict sites and of making these sites available for housing and so forth. There is some hope for the country when we tackle these problems, as they should be tackled by a nation which is young industrially but which, over the ages, has had the services in blood and sacrifice of countless generations of our people in order that it might be free. We should develop the portion of it which is free in accordance with the ideals of past generations who suffered that the nation might take its proper place in the world.

It is with great satisfaction we heard the Minister talk of the success of Aer Lingus. Too long were we without that development; too slow are we in making progress of that kind. The city from which I come has, during the past Tostal, made a special name for itself. One of the greatest impediments to people coming from abroad—choirs of international fame—was the fact that we had not got an airport. They had to come either through Dublin or Shannon. The absence of an airport in one of the big cities in Ireland is certainly restricting tourist development. I hope that, as the Minister said yesterday, when the agreement with Britain is completed, steps will be taken to do something about the construction of Cork airport and that it will be begun before the people engaged in the E.S.B. project at Inniscarra and elsewhere in the neighbourhood will be out of work and faced with the emigrant ship.

In our ports over the years, we had ships flying the flags of every country but our own until the then Minister for Industry and Commerce, Deputy Lemass, started Irish Shipping, Limited. Sometimes, force of circumtances will get general approval for these projects. When a world war was facing us here those who had objection to the establishment of our own fleet over the years had to agree to it. That scheme had been regarded as a hare-brained one. Surely we are a bigger nation than many of the nations in Europe who own shipping fleets and who have their own airports and national development on all lines which would serve their native interests.

Bord na Móna has been a great success. As the years go by we can see more and more of our industries and concerns depending on turf for their fuel, upon electric current provided from peat by the E.S.B. for heating and power. It was thought that we could not compete with our neighbours in matters like the production of steel. It was said that was a matter for the big nations. The same applied to our sugar factories which now give to farmers and farm workers, at a time of the year when it is most needed, some source of income. All these projects are national concerns in which we can take a reasonable and just pride but in which much remains to be done. People in this country are looking for leadership in that regard. They are looking also for action. Keeping files under consideration in Departments until the people interested have got discouraged will not help national development.

Reference was made during the debate to the oil refinery as another source of employment. Criticism has been made of the delays which occured in having that project completed. Possibly the people concerned were waiting for the report which appeared only during the past few weeks regarding the development of atomic or nuclear energy. That report has now appeared and, as far as I can gather from the reports appearing in the papers, it will be able to supply only 8 per cent. of the power needed during the next 20 years. Consequently oil and fuel of other kinds will continue to be used for the generation of power in industry over the next 20 years. The change over to nuclear energy will be very gradual, so that we must take advantage of the lines of progress that appear to us. If we are to sit down as a nation and criticise one another and just speak about these things, we will be doing a disservice to our nation. It will be hard to restore the confidence or the manpower which will be necessary in the national interest, and it behoves us all, in so far as we can help, to point out to the Department the things we think ought to be done and the steps they ought to take in order to provide for our national development.

We have gone part of the road; in fact, we thought a year or two ago we had reached the top of the hill after all the years we struggled to get our nation into a sound financial and economic position. But until we tackle the employment question more seriously and provide work for our people in their own land by the extension of industry and by the operation of a vigorous policy by the Minister and his Department, we are letting down the hopes of past generations and of those who suffered in our own generation for the attainment of the ideal of a nation, economically prosperous, Gaelic and free.

Mr. Rooney

The statement of the Minister on this Estimate has shown that progress continues to be made in the industrial field. Since the establishment of this State in 1922, efforts have been made by successive Governments to establish native industries in order that it would not be necessary for us to import goods which our own capital and our own labour could manufacture. We have seen over the years from every annual statement on this Estimate that progress has been made.

Notice taken that 20 Deputies were not present; House counted, and 20 Deputies being present,

Mr. Rooney

As well as hearing a tale of further progress each year from the Minister for Industry and Commerce, we also hear of the gap that still remains to be filled in the matter of establishing industries capable of producing goods we are obliged to import at present. But in this very optimistic and hopeful statement of the Minister there is also a gloomy cloud—the prospect of further C.I.E. losses. We have watched over the years the strenuous efforts being made by successive Governments to put C.I.E. on a sound basis, and it is apparent from the statement this year that we have not yet succeeded. We appear to be faced with the prospect of showing a further loss of £2,000,000 in respect of this nationalised transport concern. Since it was decided to nationalise transport under C.I.E., it appears that the new set-up has failed, first of all, to give the service expected from it and, secondly, to balance its books. If we remember the services which were provided prior to the nationalisation of transport, we will recall the very efficient services that were being provided in Dublin City for its citizens, and it makes me feel that C.I.E. will be forced and ought to take drastic steps in order, once and for all, to put these services on a sound basis.

On the statistics which are available to C.I.E., they ought to be in a position to calculate the number of buses that should be provided on any particular route and also to arrange a suitable timetable. In Dublin City, C.I.E. are failing to take advantage of a very much larger number of passengers. At the rush hour, many people are obliged to join long queues in order to get home to their lunch and return to work. Similarly, in the morning time, when they are trying to reach their place of employment, they are obliged to get into long queues. The result is that many of the younger people who might avail of those buses get bicycles which they find are a quicker mode of conveyance than the buses. Therefore, I feel that C.I.E. should take notice of the fact that so many possible users of the bus service have been forced to use bicycles in Dublin City because the available services do not suit their immediate needs. In other big cities, especially at the rush hour, seatless buses are provided for people who are anxious to get from their place of work to their home and back again. They are not so much interested in the luxury and comfort that is provided in our buses here in Dublin City. I suggest that C.I.E. should consider the possibility of providing a number of seatless buses here, particularly at the rush hour which would enable a much larger number of people to be carried more quickly to their place of destination. C.I.E. have statistics available from which they can estimate the average volume of traffic at any particular time of day, and I feel that, having those statistics, they should be in a position to take advantage of that sure market by increasing services.

C.I.E. have frequently pointed out that most of the losses are caused by the cost of providing long-distance bus services. In many cases, these country buses are running alongside railway lines and, at the same time, the railway services are showing a loss. Many of our rail services are showing losses because the plant and engines are completely out of date and uneconomic. It is probable that the railways depending on steam engines will show even greater losses, owing to the greatly increased price of British coal on which we are depending to provide these services. This immediately prompts the suggestion that these steam engines should be replaced more quickly by diesel trains; but when we do suggest the replacement, we must still consider the volume of traffic available on the lines, and the cost of providing those services and the ordinary operating costs, to see if economies can be effected and if the services provided on those lines will encourage people to travel on them.

I think most people will agree that it is more comfortable to travel long distances by rail than by road. I have in mind a journey from Dublin to Cork or from Dublin to Belfast, and of course the intermediate distances also. I feel these are two lines on which a better rail service would show a good return. The requirements of people desiring to travel to these places should be studied carefully. Many of them are business people who are limited to a certain time. Because they are unable at present to get to those places by rail as quickly as they would like, they use their own cars and suffer the hardship and all the hazards involved.

I was glad to learn during the year that C.I.E. are carrying out tests regarding the possibility of having turf-fuelled railway engines. If this could be provided, even instead of the diesel engines, it would be of great economic advantage to the country, in view of the large amount of good turf available for providing such fuel, and if it can be properly harnessed in these proposed turf engines.

In any case, I wanted to conclude my remarks relating to the prospect of further losses so far as C.I.E. is concerned by pointing out that to a great extent these losses are being incurred by the road haulage services. There was a remark in the Minister's speech that it is proposed to make certain facilities available to farmers so far as they are affected by the Road Transport Act where C.I.E. is concerned.

I have noticed from the Minister's speech, too, that the volume of production in industries has increased and it has increased from year to year ever since we set out to establish our native industries. In these days, however, it seems quite clear that the increase in the volume of production has not kept pace with the rise in the standard of living of our people. The standard of living of our people depends to a great extent on their capacity to produce. In my view, the increase in the volume of production each year has not kept pace with the rising standard of living which most of us are pleased to see the general body of people enjoying. In recent times, we have noticed that wage levels have increased and the question is: did the volume of production keep pace with the rise in wages? It seems to me that the percentage rise in wages has been greater than the percentage rise in the volume of production. The result is that a disproportion is created between wages and prices.

The Prices Advisory Body is the referee between the consumer and the producer to ensure that prices will not be more than reasonable and will not offset the advantage obtained from increases in wages. During the last year, there has been an average increase in wages of approximately 10 per cent., while, at the same time, there has been a rise in the cost of living of about 5 per cent., which shows that there is a margin in favour of the wage earner and that his spending power has been increased.

In the past year particularly, and on former occasions, when the spending power of our people was strengthened, the adverse trade balance got out of control. In the past year, owing to the increased spending power of our people, a larger quantity of goods was imported. Included in those imports were plant and machinery which, in the long run, will prove to be productive, but there was also included a large volume of consumer goods. There is where the stronger spending power of our people was dissipated and where the action of the Minister for Finance in imposing duties on certain classes of consumer goods was welcomed. Tribute should be paid to the Minister for Finance for his selection of the goods which were made the subject of duty. It is quite clear that, in making that selection, he took into consideration the danger of creating unemployment. Very little unemployment was caused by the duties which were imposed and which have had the immediate effect of improving the position so far as our adverse trade balance is concerned.

The Minister indicated that the number of people in industrial employment to-day is higher than it was ever before. A suggestion has been made that our industries should be decentralised. We must remember, when we ask private enterprise to put up the necessary finance for the establishment of a factory, the effect of transport costs on the eventual price of the goods to the consumer. It is transport costs that really make the difference between profit and loss. For that reason, despite our efforts to encourage people to establish factories in various parts of the country, we did not appear to be getting the desired results. We were forced then, in this House, to bring in the Undeveloped Areas Bill and to set up An Foras Tionscal, which enables the Government to make grants to persons who establish factories in the undeveloped areas. I note from the Minister's report that progress has been made in that respect and that he expects that next year this aspect of our industrial development will absorb an extra 2,000 workers.

While on the subject of our native industries, I should like to refer to tariffs. We have frequently received complaints from manufacturers, rightly or wrongly, that goods are being dumped in this country to the detriment of native industry. However, there is a good machine in the Department of Industry and Commerce which can direct inquiries to the source and discover whether or not this happens. We have always found that it is the policy of the Department of Industry and Commerce not to permit the unwarranted dumping of goods here and that manufacturers who have the advantage of protective tariffs here will be given every opportunity to produce the goods here for home consumption.

So far, there has not been established a sufficient variety of industries in this country to ensure the manufacture here of all classes of goods needed in the normal way by the community. That is why I welcome very much the comments of the Minister regarding the activities of the I.D.A. The I.D.A., in the few years it has been established, has given very valuable service to this country. It was set up for the express purpose of providing statistics and advising prospective manufacturers desiring to cater for the home market and for the export market. According to the report, the I.D.A. have visited certain countries for the purpose of making investigations with reference to the establishment of certain classes of industries in this country. It appears that they have made very good progress and that we will have, as we have had in recent years, the advantage of their investigations in the establishment of further factories here.

I have noticed on occasions that the I.D.A. have given very valuable advice to certain persons who thought there was an opportunity for the establishment of a certain type of industry. The authority were able to point out to them where the snags and the death traps were. That is the kind of service that we need for private enterprise.

With our adverse trade balance as it is, it is quite obvious that we will have to pursue a vigorous industrial policy, with a view to the establishment of a greater variety of manufacturing concerns within the shortest possible time. At the same time, it will be necessary to examine carefully the tariff wall behind which many of our industries are functioning at the moment. When we speak of the tariff wall, let us remember that those who have built and maintained that tariff wall are the very people in this country who are depending on those firms to deliver the goods at a reasonable price. I hold that we should pursue a policy here, not alone of industrial protection, but a policy whereby that tariff wall will be lowered according as our industries get more firmly established, according as they are equipped technically, and in experience and plant, to compete with outsiders.

If Deputies can visualise a brick wall, I would suggest that a layer of bricks be taken down until the wall is brought down to a reasonable height. A very high tariff wall is very unfair to the people in this country who are compelled to pay an unreasonably high price for the goods produced behind that protective wall. I know that in recent years the Department of Industry and Commerce have been watching very carefully the effect of tariffs on the price of goods to the consumer here. I know that when protection is sought and when increased tariffs are asked for, those who want that protection and seek those tariffs have to put up a very strong case to the Department of Industry and Commerce before they are permitted to have that degree of protection.

One thing is noticeable in the matter of goods produced here in Ireland and that is the high quality of those goods, but very often we find that, while the quality is very high, the variety is very limited. You often meet people who are quite satisfied with the high quality of the home-produced goods, but who are not satisfied with the variety and choice of those goods which are available to them. In such case, the home-produced goods find themselves in competition with imported goods of equal quality and of much greater variety.

This morning, I heard Deputy Lemass speak about the demand for electric power in this country. I believe he mentioned that the demand each year seems to increase by approximately 12 per cent. It seemed also that last year the increase in demand amounted only to 8 per cent. I should like to point out to Deputy Lemass that the E.S.B., like every other national concern, are trying to provide a public service. When the service was not adequate, there was a higher demand for it, but, according as they reach the stage where they are giving the full service, it can be expected that the demand will fall.

Another point on which the Minister laid emphasis in the course of his speech was the minerals development programme and the encouragement given to the Canadian enterprise in Avoca. It is very heartening to note from the Minister's speech that it is expected that, when the Avoca mines get going at the end of the year, full employment will be given to at least 500 persons. The Minister's tour to America in connection with the possibility of having dollar industries established in this country has encouraged other enterprising mineral prospecting concerns to come here. It appears that there are good prospects of having a copper mining industry established in this country. It seems clear, from modern developments and techniques, that copper, in the future, will be a very valuable material by reason of its very valuable non-rusting properties, its durability and flexibility. It is quite possible that, in future years, copper will be more valuable than gold by reason of its very serviceable qualities. For this reason, I welcome the fact that foreign prospectors have been encouraged to come into this country and to carry out certain tests, with a view to having copper mines established, if there is copper to be found in sufficient quantities in places which are being explored at present and other places which have not yet been explored.

I have no views about the possibility of finding oil in this country, but it is no harm for us to avail of the services of people who can carry out exploration work to see if there is any prospect in that respect. I have noted from the Minister's speech that progress has been made towards the establishment of the oil refinery under the combined direction of Esso, Caltex and Shell. Those three huge international concerns, combined, should be able to establish a modern refinery in this country which will effect considerable saving to consumers of oil here, besides giving a large volume of employment.

Mention was made by the Minister of the export of Irish whiskey and the value of the exports was stated to be about £86,000. That seems to me to be a very small figure when we compare it with the exports of Scotch whisky, which are approximately £30,000,000. I believe that export of whiskey should be concentrated upon by this country and, if the public taste in other countries is not the same as the public taste here, we should try to cater for it. I am making that suggestion because I consider the export value of £86,000 very small, considering our capacity for producing here the raw materials which go into the manufacture of whiskey and comparing our exports of that commodity with the value of the exports of Scotch whisky, which has apparently been manufactured to suit the palates of a very large number of people in different parts of the world. All the raw materials for our whiskey exports can be produced here and will not involve the importation of any raw materials.

We should, of course, concentrate on industries which do not involve the import of raw materials. Indeed, many of our existing industries are merely processing machines, because large quantities of raw materials have to be imported, processed here and then sold to our own people as finished articles. Some of these concerns have undoubtedly been able to go into the export markets with the finished article, but, in our circumstances, our real needs lie in home manufacture for home consumption. We have not yet reached the stage when we can say that we are producing and manufacturing at home all the needs of our own people. The result is that only a small number of our manufacturing concerns have been able to engage in the export trade. We should concentrate now on the establishment of further industries in respect of a wider variety of articles.

In recent years, we have seen the remarkable advances that have been made in the matter of turf production by means of machinery. We have seen the value of milled turf. In the past we had to acclimatise ourselves to hand-won turf. Both the machine-won turf and the milled peat we know to-day seem to be very attractive propositions as against hand-won turf. I know of one large institution here in Dublin, completed only recently, which is geared for the use of turf. No oil will be required; no coal will be required. The new method of processing turf has enabled this institution to be geared for the use of turf to provide heating, hot water and all the services associated with a public institution, such as a hospital. This is all the more welcome, remembering that the price of coal is increasing year by year. It is welcome, too, because of the fact that on occasion the British National Coal Board has been unable to supply us with the tonnage they agreed to give us; and the increasing cost of coal has the further disadvantage that it, in turn, increases the cost of all kinds of goods, the manufacture of which is dependent upon coal.

I note with satisfaction that our tourist industry continues to show a very substantial revenue and that, from the point of view of our national income, it is the second largest revenue-producing service we have. In various parts of the country, there is a considerable improvement in the hotels which cater for tourists. Credit for that must go to the Irish Tourist Association and the Irish Tourist Board in ensuring that modern amenities are provided for holiday-makers here.

The Minister referred to the forthright declaration by two very large trade unions in relation to unofficial strikes, the damage which such strikes do and the hardships they cause on the defenceless people, defenceless people who are often the families of those engaged in such strikes. The attitude of the trade unions is to be welcomed; and we expect that the members of these unions will heed their leaders and will not, by unofficial action, cause hardship and economic loss. These temporary stoppages very often result in considerable losses, losses which cannot be recouped. Last year, we were faced with the possibility of a gas strike in Dublin. Anybody can appreciate the hardship which would have been caused by such a strike.

Restrictive trade practices have, to some extent, been put under the microscope within the past few years. We should remember that the practices which some trade unions engage in in relation to restrictions they impose ought also to be considered when this question of restrictive practices generally arises. Restrictive trade practices do not apply solely to the supplier of goods. They are often quite common in the case of those who give their services. For that reason, it is desirable that both aspects of the problem of restrictive practices should be examined and subjected to scrutiny.

Mr. Davern

Unfortunately, we are unable to congratulate the Minister at this stage on the financial and economic position of the country; but it is heartening to know that the day has disappeared when Irish industry was criticised and looked down upon by most, if not all, of the Fine Gael Deputies and speakers in this country. The time is gone when they were referred to as backlane factories, sweat shops and so on——

Mr. Coogan

They are all closed up now, thank heaven.

Mr. Davern

Yes; they blew away when Deputy Coogan came over from the Claddagh. We ought to be grateful that we have converted Fine Gael to that extent, anyway. Probably one of the greatest boasts we have is that Deputy Lemass has succeeded in converting those free traders to a small extent. I am afraid Deputy Rooney was letting the cat out of the bag when he criticised the high tariffs. If he had his way, like most of the Fine Gael Deputies, he would like to see the ports open again to Chinese and Japanese goods and all the other cheap imports that were allowed into this country to the detriment of the economic position of the State. As I say, it is a boast of ours that we converted them, and I hope as time goes on they will retract many of the statements they made in regard to Irish industries in the past.

Undoubtedly Irish industries are first class. We had to start at the ground and build them up. We had not the technical knowledge of other nations which had been free for hundreds of years. But notwithstanding all these impediments, I think we can safely say that Irish industrialists can compare favourably with their counterparts in any other country in the world. Now and again we hear talk about the high price of Irish products. It is quite true that we can get cheaper articles on the market. Any day the Minister so desires he can do that; but what price will he pay? More and more unemployment, more and more emigration, a higher and higher adverse trade balance and a greater difficulty with regard to the balance of payments. That is the price we will pay for any interference with the tariffs that protect Irish industries.

I remember speaking to one industrialist from another country. He told me that at one time—not so long ago at all—you could get a pretty good man for 4d. or 5d. a day. He was moaning and bewailing the terrible change that had taken place in his country: now he has to pay 2/6. I hope that that day does not come to this country, anyway.

Again I am sorry I cannot congratulate the Minister on the position in regard to unemployment. Notwithstanding all the promises made two years ago by the Minister and all his supporters that they had a remedy for unemployment, to-day, in the middle of summer, we still have over 60,000 unemployed. Whether that is a true picture of the number unemployed or not is very doubtful. There are many thousands of people in this country who never register on the unemployment lists, and I can safely say that we can add possibly another 5,000 or 10,000 to that figure. That figure is very alarming at this period of the year. Bord na Móna is going at full swing and absorbing from 9,000 to 10,000 people in seasonal employment, and there are many other industries, which can only operate at this time of the year, also working at full pressure. I hope the Minister will take some steps very soon—certainly before the hard winter sets in—to try to put more of our people into employment. I am satisfied that, for any measures he may take to alleviate the distress that unemployment always brings with it, he will get the full support not only of the Deputies in this House but of the country as a whole, even though those steps may not be too popular.

Unemployment is unquestionably one of the greatest scourges of this country. If we had not emigration, I would say it was the worst. Unfortunately, we have more and more people emigrating every day. The exodus to England and, at a later stage, to Australia, Rhodesia, the U.S.A. and other places is now becoming alarming. Even the people who considered a few years ago that emigration was an outlet for our people, are now realising and appreciating fully that it is a cancer in the side of this nation. Every man and every woman who decides to leave this country is unquestionably a very, very serious loss. While there are some people who emigrate because of love of travel or adventure, we have to admit, I am afraid, that the majority of our people are emigrating because of lack of suitable employment here. Almost 250,000 people have left the country since the last census. I think that is very alarming. It certainly is something which must of necessity be of great concern to the Government. It is for the Government, if it lies in their power, to try to find a remedy to stop emigration from this country.

Deputy Rooney mentioned tourism. It is certainly is playing, and has played, a very great part in the economics of this country. It was estimated in 1946, at a time when it was possibly easier to estimate the value of tourism than it is now, that it was worth about £35,000,000 to this country. I doubt very much if we have reached that sum since, or anything near it. I know that people came to this country at that time because they were unable to go elsewhere; but I am afraid we are not holding out the attractions we should for the purpose of getting more and more people to visit this country. No artificial stage setting I know of could do more to attract tourists than the natural beauty and natural resources of our country.

I should like the Minister, if at all possible, to cause a survey to be made of the roads leading to many of our places of attraction. He will find, when he receives the report, if he so decides, that bad roads are in many places responsible for our tourists not revisiting places of scenic beauty in this country.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Roads are the responsibility of another Minister.

Mr. Davern

I quite agree, but, with a view to increasing the number of tourists to this country, I merely suggested to the Minister that, in the interests of tourism which plays such a big part in our economy, he should cause a survey to be made of the roads. It would be very helpful.

The position of farmers does not arise on this Estimate.

Mr. Davern

I am glad to be in a position to congratulate Bord na Móna on their splendid success during the past year. I am glad, also, that we do not now hear shouts by Fine Gael Deputies about throwing money down the drain as we heard when Bord na Móna was first proposed in order to make use of one of the natural resources of our country. I am sure that Fine Gael Deputies must frequently feel ashamed of themselves now when they think of the many disparaging remarks they made about Bord na Móna and its prospects of success. Just consider the present position so far as rural electrification is concerned. I hope that, very soon, some of our trains will be using turf and, as it is, many of our houses are heated by the product of our bogs. When this great industry was being established the Minister at the time had a difficult job because it was impossible to persuade the Fine Gael Deputies of the favourable prospects and, indeed, even many of the people who now sing its praises were undoubtedly pessimistic with regard to the development of peat in this country. However, peat was developed and now plays a greater part than the vision of many people would allow them to see in the past.

It is with peat that I hope, in the near future, other deposits in this country will be discovered and worked fully. With that in view, I would say to the Minister that the Geological Survey Section as it appears to us is, I think, mediocre. I do not want to throw any disparagement on the officers who constitute that section of the Department because I do not think the fault lies with them. To a great extent, they are working on limited old files to which they have got access. Regardless of what it costs, I think a full geological survey would pay dividends. Take, for instance, the copper mines at Hollyford which were worked within the memory of many old people still living. At that time, they produced a considerable amount of material even though its price was very low. The mining was worked as an economic unit just as a firm is worked. I just want to mention, in passing, that that particular part of Tipperary was the only part of the country that was not affected during the famine years. The copper mines there played a great part in saving the people from the ravages of the famine. That shows how important a geological survey of the country can be. The Minister should have a complete picture of the over-all position.

So far as I know, no real attempt has yet been made in this country to obtain a complete picture of our mineral deposits. That is a great pity and the sooner it is done the better. I have been in the Geological Survey Office. They have to admit there that their knowledge is limited and that it is obtained either from old files or as a result of a recent survey. I always have confidence in geological surveys and I believe that many of the old theories were fully justified—theories that this country is rich in mineral wealth.

There are a few local matters to which I want to refer. C.I.E. has closed down a branch line which very much affects the town in which I reside and part of my constituency. I submit it is the duty of C.I.E. to provide an alternative service as good as, if not better than, the one they closed down under the 1933 Transport Act. We find, however, that having closed down the Goold's Cross-Cashel branch line no alternative accommodation, so far as passengers are concerned, has been provided.

Mr. A. Barry

Would you use it, anyway, if you got it? I do not think you would.

Mr. Davern

When the Deputy was doing his courting, he used it himself. Deputy Barry, I think, is with me in trying to find an answer to the problem of a passenger service to Cashel. He has an interest there too, or he had. The railway line has been closed down and no alternative passenger service has been given to the people for a number of years. The result is that people doing their ordinary business naturally use all other services available to them and the business of that town suffers as a result. I am not quite sure what the legal position is, but I know at that time it was either indicated or understood that a transport service would be given where railway lines were closed down because they were not economic propositions. We cannot blow hot and cold, I suppose, and we cannot say uneconomic lines should remain open and at the same time throw up our hands in horror when we hear of another £1,750,000 of a deficit for C.I.E., but I believe, in fairness to the people, C.I.E. should give some fairly decent type of transport to meet the wishes of the people.

I fail to understand the whole attitude of C.I.E. towards transport in that area. They closed down the railway line and then they employ a private haulier to bring merchandise from Thurles Station 13 miles away, to Cashel which is within six miles of Goold's Cross. If anybody can tell me, assure me, or convince me that is an economic proposition and that it is in the interest of C.I.E. to do this, his convincing powers will have to be reasonably good.

Lastly, I want to speak on decentralisation of industry. We find that many of the smaller towns are forgotten during the period when somebody desires to revive industry in this country. Every day that one comes into Dublin by a different road, one finds some industry or other being established. That in itself plays a very big part—and has been doing so for many years—in the flight from the land. While city Deputies like Deputy Rooney will argue that the favourable conditions are there——

Mr. James Tully

Do not let Deputy Rooney hear you describing him like that.

Mr. Davern

——because they are nearer the port, these Deputies forget that the costs of distribution also play a big part in the success of an industry here or in any other country. I think it is high time that an end was put to the continued industrialisation of Dublin, Cork and other cities which, in my opinion, are sufficiently industrialised to meet their labour content. Many of them are already over-industrialised with the result that they are top-heavy, and there is always the danger of future wars in the minds of industrialists and statesmen.

Decentralisation of industry is the one thing above any other that can help to keep the people on the land. By giving to our smaller towns some inducement, some indication that either now or in the future they will be able to get more employment as a result of local industries and increased demand on the land for more food, people will be encouraged to remain at home. I believe that decentralisation will undoubtedly play a very big part in remedying our economic ills. I know that industrialists are always inclined to go where the amenities of life exist, but the Minister and his advisers should always bear in mind that people living in the remote parts of the country have had to be brought up there and have lived there, denied, as they are, of many of the amenities of life. If that lack is all the industrialists would suffer, I fail to see where they could reasonably have any grievance.

I ask the Minister, then, to decentralise industry, because by so doing, he will keep the young men and women on the land and will help to stop emigration and unemployment, which seem to be increasing. These two evils can be described as the economic cancers of our country. I also hope the Minister will bear in mind what I said about railways and seek fair play for the small towns, which are very important from the tourist viewpoint. If he does, naturally, we will sing his praises; if he does not, I suppose we will continue to condemn him.

Mr. Coogan

I rise to congratulate the Minister on having secured for us by his visits abroad one major industry in Galway City, an industry which early in the new year will provide employment for many hundreds of people. I say to the Minister: you are well worthy of your passage, in spite of what has been said in that respect by certain sections of the Press and also in this House. I hope that before the Undeveloped Areas Act expires in 1958, it will have justified itself, so far as Galway is concerned.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.

Dáil Éireann debate - Thursday, 21 Jun 1956