Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 26 Jun 1956

Vol. 158 No. 7

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

Debate resumed on the following motion:—
That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration.—(Deputy Lemass).

If the prognostications of the Minister for Finance in the recent debates on the Vote on Account and on the Budget had been uttered from this side of the House, I am sure they would have been described by the Tánaiste as gloomy forebodings indicative of poor digestion on this side of the House, of digestive processes working unsatisfactorily or a feeling of resentment or frustration. We might be told that Opposition Parties often fail without very good reason, except the fact that they appear for the time being to be in opposition.

The sobering words, if not the very serious and grave utterances, of the Minister for Finance have possibly had one beneficial effect anyway, in that they reduced some of his colleagues to a proper frame of mind. I do not know whether I should associate the virtue of humility with particular Ministers, but in the case of the Tánaiste, I should like to say that, judging by his opening statement, the speeches of the Minister for Finance and the view of the Government which they enshrine seem to have reduced him to what might be described as a properly penitential frame of mind.

The Minister for Finance told us that he did not consider it would be realistic to expect any great increase in the volume of exports. The only significant increase he feels he can count upon during the present year is 100,000 additional cattle exported at the reduced prices now ruling. If that is so, it is obviously of the greatest necessity in the national interest that we should concentrate upon the possibilities of overcoming whatever disabilities—whether they are direct or indirect—are caused by reason of the fall in prices and the less favourable outlook for the agricultural industry.

The Minister for Finance went on to tell us that he feared the worsening terms of trade would continue to be a leading factor in the position this year. Trade figures show that we had an import excess again for the first four months of the present year of £35,000,000. A further £7,000,000 or nearly £8,000,000 must be added in respect of the adverse balance for May, 1956, so that, as far as the first five months are concerned, it appears that there is no improvement and the Government, if we are to judge by the statements of the Minister for Finance as representing its attitude and its point of view, has not been able to hold out any prospect of improvement.

With regard to the agricultural industry, it was quite obvious for the past few years that the economy and the relative boom conditions we had been experiencing depended upon the high prices for cattle in the English market. That situation has changed. The agricultural price index shows a significant fall as compared with last year and the price review settled by the British Government which determines the level of beef prices has the important condition that, when it comes round again next February, the next determination of prices will be based on the prices ruling in the preceding 12 months.

While we may admit that the British authorities may strive in the interests of their own economy and of their farmer-producers to spread out the fall in agricultural prices and avoid any catastrophic fall, nevertheless it seems clear enough that their aim is to effect a reduction, gradually but substantially. I pointed out on the Estimate for the Department of Agriculture that, with regard to bacon, poultry and eggs, products in which our small farmers are particularly interested, the results of the price review over there were not satisfactory. If they may be so regarded by the beef producers, they certainly have not been satisfactory to the smaller producers who have to depend on these products.

At the same time, farmers' costs, here as elsewhere, have gone up. They can point to the fact that, whatever may be said about agricultural production not having increased during the past 50 years, it is entirely due to extraneous circumstances—generally the occurrence of a war—that the agricultural industry has been enabled to raise itself out of the doldrums. Furthermore, it has been accepted, in regard to the determination of prices over the water, that, in view of the difficulty of assuring to farmer-producers benefits comparable to those that might be granted to industrialists or exporters, in the fixing of prices allowance must be made for the capital invested by farmers in their industry. It is an essential principle, in my view, in the determination of prices for agricultural produce, that the Government should endeavour to ensure that farmers will have incentives to increase production and that the price will not only remunerate them for increasing costs, including labour, but will also have due regard to the capital which the farmer must invest in his holding, stock, machinery and equipment if he is to get the results we would all wish.

Over this whole situation lies the shadow of the Argentine beef trade. I am not trying to create any panic by anything I say in that regard. I have referred to it for the past few years and so has the Minister for Agriculture. One has only to read the leading article in the Farmers' Journal to realise how perturbed our farmers are at a situation which they think means there may be an importation of up to 1,000,000 head of Argentine cattle to Great Britain. It is with that background that we have to regard the trade figures which have caused such anxiety. When we consider that, of the import excess of £35,000,000, less than 50 per cent. seems to be attributable to the sterling area for the first four months of the present year, it makes us feel that the steps that have been taken in the way of reduction of imports by the imposition of special levies are not sufficient.

The May figures indicated a slight increase in respect of the situation because exports were up to a figure comparable to that of the preceding year and imports were down substantially. Nevertheless, as I have already stated, even if we assume that May was a fairly good month—and we had the advantage in that month of comparatively heavy exports of live stock and a certain movement in that branch of the industry—the figure of well over £7,000,000 for a month which might be described as more favourable than the preceding months is not one that we can view with any degree of satisfaction.

If a full consciousness of the gravity of the situation is in the mind of the Government then I think sufficient steps are not being taken to encourage the farming community who may have, as the Tánaiste and others suggested, the feeling that if they produce more they are not likely to gain, that there is a shrinking market, that prices are falling and that they ought to be content with maintaining the level of production of the present time. If that point of view exists among them, I think this only action of the Government in the way of giving incentive to the smaller men—who will, during the coming year, feel the pinch, I am afraid, more than they have felt it since cattle prices began to fall—is not sufficient and that there would be need for a more imaginative and, if one may again use the phrase, a more dynamic approach to the problems of the agricultural industry.

There should be greater effort to get the co-operation, the goodwill and the participation, in whatever schemes are in existence or may come into being, of the associations of agriculture and producers so that they will feel this is not just merely a task which they are being asked to perform by a Government or Opposition or political or other public leaders but is one in which the responsibility has been placed directly upon themselves and which, through their own representatives, through their own organisations, they are being asked to fulfill.

In Great Britain, you have various local organisations, county committees of agriculture, and, during the war period and since, through them the policy of building up agricultural production over there has very largely been carried out. It seems to me that some similar organisation representative of the farmers themselves— whether technicians, managers, experts in transport problems, processing and marketing—could be called in and is essential, if we are to get out of the doldrums which may not even remain doldrums but may proceed to blow fairly high winds and hurricanes in the years to come.

Now is the time to concentrate on these possibilities and to take the representatives of the agricultural industry fully into the confidence of the Government and make them feel they are getting a lead and encouragement and, what is more important from the farmers' point of view, some kind of an incentive that will indicate to them that, over the years, they can go ahead with improving their holdings, expanding their output and production and adopting the necessary machinery which rural electrification and mechanisation have placed at their disposal and, where it is possible for them to utilise it, to step up the produce of their farms.

The Minister pointed to a reduction of £716,000 on last year's figure for subsidies in respect of flour and wheat-meal prices. He has stated that this reduction is due to a fall in the cost of native wheat and to the decision that no subsidy would be paid in respect of flour used for confectionery and biscuit manufacture. May I ask whether any portion of the reduction is attributable to the cost of imported wheat? It is significant that when the Minister for Finance was speaking on the Vote on Account he described this substantial reduction in the figure for flour and wheatmeal subsidies as being attributable to both home and imported wheat. I imagine the House would like to know just what proportion of the reduction is attributable to native and what portion to imported wheat and what portion to the other factor mentioned by the Tánaiste, that is, to the change in respect of the subsidy for confectionery and biscuit manufacture.

That means that the subsidy estimated for the present year comes to £6,284,000; last year it was £7,000,000. In the year 1954-55 it came to over £8,000,000, so that there has been a reduction, and that reduction, I think it can be argued, has been at the expense of the producers. The Tánaiste is very eloquent and very emotional when he talks of the steps we took to reduce the cost of food subsidies in 1952, but as far as the Estimates of his Department are concerned they have fallen from over £8,000,000 to £6,250,000, roughly, according to the figures for the present year. That is at least £1,750,000 in the two years, and I suggest that the reduction has been effected at the expense of the wheat producers of this country, at a time when we are importing wheat to the extent of millions of pounds. Recently the figure of £5,000,000 loomed very large in our import figures. One wonders whether it is good economy, common sense or wise for the State to expend our hard-earned dollars on foreign wheat, or any other foreign grain, while we have this anxiety and this necessity which undoubtedly exists to step up agricultural production. The only way to do it, I suggest, is by giving farmers incentives, not by giving them disincentives to turn them from wheat growing or tillage operations to some other line.

The Tánaiste used to tell us in his halcyon days that prices were altogether too high and "must be reduced by subsidies if necessary." In fact, subsidies were to be introduced to bring prices back to the pre-1952 Budget figures in respect of the main foodstuffs. In his election address, as well as in a letter that he wrote, the Tánaiste went so far as to tell the electors in the most solemn manner that he pledged himself to a reduction in prices, and not alone that, but to a reduction of the taxes on cigarettes, beer and spirits. Prices were altogether too high, he said, and must be reduced by subsidies if necessary. The cost-of-living index figure is now about ten points higher than when the Tánaiste took office. He has referred to the activities of the Prices Advisory Body, and while the matter was under discussion we had an interjection from the Government Benches that Deputies on this side of the House should perhaps go down to the sittings of the Prices Advisory Body and make their case there against the increases in prices that are being sought by various interests. One would imagine, as Deputy Lemass pointed out, that in respect of these matters the responsibility is surely upon the Government in the first instance. The Tánaiste has asked trade union leaders and other representatives of public opinion and those who might be described as representing consumers' interests to go down there.

An Irish economist said, when the report of the Commission on Emigration and Population was published—I think it is in the minority report, or in a statement made by him about that time—that he was astonished that Governments and politicians apparently could still believe—I do not think he said "purport to believe"; let us assume he said "could still believe"— that they could reduce prices. The Taoiseach has plaintively admitted, and offered as excuse for the failure to reduce prices, reduce taxes and give the people a better living at a lower cost, that they could not control the situation. They had done as much as any Government had done, he said, but what could they do, in effect, when prices of goods which had to be imported had increased?

If the Taoiseach takes that point of view, that the situation is one which the Government could not control and could not take steps to negative and set at naught, what purpose would be served by anybody going down to the Prices Advisory Body and making the case, which the Taoiseach and, presumably, the Tánaiste and other members of the Government have accepted, that these increases are inevitable, that nothing could be done about them and that we must simply grin and bear them?

We had the Minister for Finance telling us, as reported in column 328, Volume 157 of the Official Report during the debate on the Vote on Account, that we are consuming more than we are producing. He emphasised that viewpoint with an even greater degree of determination and earnestness in his Budget statement. The Minister for Agriculture repeated the argument over the week-end. We still remember that we were told, when the Fianna Fáil administration suggested that steps should be taken to deal with that situation, that we were telling the people they were living too well; that we wanted to interfere with their standard of living; their way of life; that we stood for a programme of austerity and wanted the people to put on hair shirts, and so on.

Now we have the situation in which the Minister for Finance tells us that a further increase in money incomes, not matched by an improvement in production and productivity, can only at this juncture drive up domestic prices. The Minister also said that an expansion of exports requires that costs of production be prevented from rising. He hoped for stability in money incomes. It was pointed out by the Tánaiste also, in reiterating what the Taoiseach had already said— changing his ground completely from the position he occupied only two years ago—that, in addition to the circumstances over which the Government had no control in respect of increases in the price of imported raw materials and so on, increases in wages had contributed in varying degrees to the increased cost of industrial production. As regards industrial production, the Tánaiste has given exactly the same figures as he gave last year. These figures have not yet doubled over those of 1938. As was pointed out recently, earnings have increased at a greater rate than production.

The report of the Central Statistics Office, called the Irish Statistical Survey, has pointed out in its last report on page 34, that since 1948 the earnings index has remained above the cost of living, the figure for 1954 being 253 for the earnings index and 232 for the cost of living. The organ of the Trade Union Research Department has pointed out that there is a figure of, I think, £53,000,000, about 45 per cent. of our current expenditure, spent on social and ancillary services during the present year.

Everyone knows there has been an enormous increase in the cost of these services, as well as an expansion of their scope. The cost of all that must come out of the increased production which is not there and which, in respect of the most important branch of our economy, agriculture, fell by 2 per cent. last year. It is no wonder that the Minister for Finance should try to impress upon the country and on those behind him who participate in the Government that there should be stability in respect of money incomes. I do not know whether it affords any great consolation, but it is perhaps encouraging that the Tánaiste on this occasion has followed suit, at least to the extent of admitting that increases in wages have contributed in varying degrees to the increased costs of industrial production.

The Tánaiste told us that coal prices had gone up in England. He referred as well to freight charges. One would like to know what inquiry has been made in this regard, because the Tánaiste has stated that a close eye is being kept on this situation, that it is constantly the subject of review and attention. One would like to know what the position is with regard to our fuel reserves. What inquiries, if any, are being made by the industrial research body into the problem of fuel utilisation? For example, have we succeeded in evolving a peat-burning domestic water boiler which will compete with other boilers on the market and which will give better results and cheaper results to the Irish housewife? What inquiry has been made in respect of authracite production from our native coal resources? Are steps being taken to see we get the maximum production? In regard to the areas which the Tánaiste outlined as having been selected for special examination and survey, it was very noticeable that no reference was made to the Kilkenny and Midlands coalfields. We know that the people have been promised that a survey would take place and I should like to ask whether it is in contemplation, what has been done about it, and if it has been started, are we likely to have any report during the present year?

With regard to freight charges, it goes without saying that the recent increases in cross-Channel rates have gravely affected the agricultural industry. The representatives of the livestock export trade have, I feel sure, made representations in connection with the matter and one wonders whether, in view of what the Tánaiste has stated elsewhere in his opening statement with regard to steps being taken to develop our native shipping fleet, whether more will not have to be done to ensure that, in competing in the foreign market, our exporters and producers will not have to bear any unnecessary handicaps or burdens.

There is the question of charges in general as compared with the charges of our competitors, the Danes or the New Zealanders. These countries, by reason of the better organisation of their producers and their organisation, not alone for production but for marketing, and for the export of their produce, are able to place that produce on the English market at prices and at rates that I am sure would astonish you. As regards the loading and the unloading, the handling, the packing and unpacking and the delivery to ship and ex-ship, when you consider the high proportion of shipping charges that must go with these items, you will realise that the long sea journey does not cost any disproportionate figure. In regard to shipping costs, the costs that are significant and the costs that can be tackled are those involving the handling and the shipping of the goods, particularly their handling at the ports, and one would like to know whether any inquiry has been or will be made into that matter.

If we intend to take advantage of the opportunity that has been afforded of getting a real foothold on the continental market, it is obviously necessary that our exports to that market should be prompt and speedy, that if the produce itself is not to suffer, it ought to be certain that all arrangements are made for the most speedy and efficient despatch of the goods and that no local obstacles will hold up what might be a very successful venture and what might afford to Irish agriculture reasonable alternatives, at any rate, to the main market upon which they depend and about which they are so anxious at the present time.

The attitude across the Border is that transport costs are of the first importance in the marketing of their produce and are also, of course, of great importance in securing raw materials and necessary imports at the lowest possible price. We are undoubtedly at a disadvantage in that respect as compared with our industrial and other competitors across the water. They have various advantages in relation to raw materials, credit and advice, facilities about marketing, large scale organisation, and so on, that we have not got, which make it essential that a real and thorough examination be made of all the items that go to build up the cost of our agricultural produce between the time it leaves the farm and the time it is placed upon the English market.

In that connection, it would seem that our contribution to transport is not getting less, but is increasing. In the year ended 1952, our contribution towards the G.N.R. was £225,000; in April to August, 1953, it was £260,000; in September, 1953 to September, 1954, it was £288,000; in 1954-55, it was £352,000; and the Tánaiste has told us that the contribution towards running expenses, capital expenditure and losses will be much greater during the present year. He has also told us that the losses of C.I.E., which amounted to £866,000 last year, are likely to be doubled this year.

It is consoling to turn from that picture to the progress made in respect of shipping. It is a hazardous trade and at times has had serious depressions. The capital expenditure is heavy, but with the booming trading conditions in the world at the present time, with the fact that our cargo vessels and our tankers have been so successful so far and that we have gained that experience and that knowledge, not without profit financially, it seems fairly sure that, if we pay due attention to conditions and try to maintain the contacts we have and gradually develop them, there should continue to be a bright future for Irish shipping.

When we turn to the airports, we find that although the position has improved, there are still very substantial deficits. In 1954-55, counting everything that was chargeable or attributable to the running of the airport, we find there was a deficiency of £500,000, which is being reduced. I notice that the revenue at Shannon seems somewhat less proportionately than the greatly increased numbers of landings there would seem to indicate. I should also like to ask whether the cost of the Viscounts that were purchased some years ago and which are giving such satisfactory results has been paid out of the revenues accruing from Aer Lingus operations.

Towards the conclusion of his speech in regard to State-sponsored bodies, the Tánaiste stated at column 794, Volume 158 of the Official Debates of 20th June, 1956:—

"These bodies were deliberately constituted so as to afford them the greatest possible liberty of action in their day-to-day operations. Broadly speaking, my functions with regard to them are confined to the appointment of members of the board, to ensuring that their general activities conform with national policy and to ensure that full value is obtained for the State funds which may be made available to the bodies each year."

I think we can all concur in these principles and I, at any rate, would like personally to concur very fully in the latter statement. Because our resources are limited, it is necessary to see, as was pointed out in a paper to which reference has been made here already in debates, that we get the utmost value for State capital expenditure—not merely that we provide employment, which is a very worthy purpose and very desirable, but that as far as possible the employment will be productive, and that, through the employment of State expenditure, in the most economic and efficient way, we will be able to build up funds and reserves which will cover depreciation, which is a very heavy item in these undertakings, and build up reserves for the provision of fresh equipment which runs into very high figures indeed. It is suggested that in that way a buoyant and dynamic economy so far as these bodies are concerned can be developed, that we can look forward with assurance, knowing that these bodies are taking every possible step to safeguard their financial future and are planning ahead.

This House has given them the opportunity and advantage of being able to do that, without day-to-day interference in their business and without professing to dictate to them what their policy should be. Nevertheless, it is unfortunate, seeing that the great bulk of national capital expenditure for years past has gone into these undertakings, that Deputies who are interested should not be enabled to get fuller information, even if they only got it as visitors, of seeing what is in progress, what is contemplated and what these boards and bodies have in mind for development during the coming years.

The Tánaiste has referred to the operations of Bord na Móna and the setting up of a new briquette factory on a large scale. He has hinted, if he has not definitely said so, that perhaps there may be an increase in the price of briquettes. Personally I have always tried to support the native as against imported fuel, and so have a good many others, but, as a matter of general interest, and some importance to the community, one would like to know what the estimated cost of the briquettes may be. I may be told that the plans have not yet advanced so far, but when I detect this implication, that there may be an increase in price, the criterion may be that we shall have to pay the much higher price for imported coal. Presumably Bord na Móna will have a margin to work upon and greater scope to produce and sell its briquettes in competition with foreign coal.

That is, of course, a point of view, but one expects these State and semi-State bodies to have regard to the consumer interest and also to the investment side with which I have just dealt. We cannot blame them and we must sympathise with them and encourage them in building up their finances in order to be prepared for future eventualities—to develop, expand and progress.

There is however also the point of view of the consumer. Many, even in a Socialist economy, Socialist economists, would contend that if there is any advantage to be gained, if these institutions are in a position to produce more and to have the backing of the State to support them in their efforts over a long period of years, it should be regarded as a primary and cardinal principle of their policy that the consumer will get the utmost benefit from their operations. Many critics, in fact, contend that an economy that does not aim at or cannot hold out hope of a reduction in price in respect of manufactured commodities or other products, particularly when they are being financed on a large scale and produced by the operations of State organisations, has no great future.

It has struck me very forcibly when the Tániste is lecturing to industrialists or business people about keeping down prices and paying the utmost attention to the consumer interest, that we really ought to examine our own position before we give lectures to others. Unless we are satisfied that bodies, for which the Government and this House have a special responsibility, are doing their utmost and giving good example by way of advantages and reductions to the consumer, then it is anomalous, to say the least of it.

I noticed that the British Electricity Authority and the Coal Board have announced that they are pegging their prices for the coming year. Smaller units run on private capital are unable to face the fluctuations of higher costs of materials, high wage costs and market difficulties and may not always be able to give the lead in that matter, but if we are to carry out in earnest the policy the Minister for Finance has adumbrated of trying to stabilise incomes, we surely ought to ask the State bodies to set an example. This applies in particular to those which have not serious elements of competition but have rather a strong element of monopoly. Some of them have that element of competition, for which allowance must be made; but those that have the benefit of monopoly in a special degree, and State support, ought surely to give good example.

The Tánaiste told us, as Deputy Lemass reminded him, that it was not anticipated by him or by the Government that there would be any risk of retarding development or necessity to increase charges for current in respect of the new subsidisation arrangements for rural electrification. Previously, as I understood it, the position was that the E.S.B. had to repay half the cost and the other half was supposed to be allowed to them by way of grants. I do not know if all these grants were passed in the annual Estimates in this House, or what the total liability that has been placed on them in respect of the recent legislation may be. I have seen the figure of £2,000,000 mentioned, but I do not know whether it is the correct figure or not. At any rate, an additional burden has been placed upon them.

When that was pointed out from this side of the House, the Tánaiste said— I quote from column 274, Volume 150 of the Official Debates—of the E.S.B.:—

"They have had a combination of a low average age for their assets, a policy of a high standard of maintenance and of building up substantial reserves. This combination has put them in a very good financial position."

The Minister for Lands interjected that we had the advantage of having the cheapest electricity rate in Europe. I do not know if that can be authenticated or verified. I hope it can.

It has been suggested that if the E.S.B. reduced their prices there might be a greater demand for current. It has been an accepted principle in the world of business and trade that, if you are not getting the market, you reduce the price and the more you reduce the price of your products the more likelihood there is of increasing sales. The Tánaiste told us that last year an aggressive policy of salesmanship had been carried out. In that connection, I hope the E.S.B. will do its utmost to give the most expert specialist advice possible to the farmers to enable and encourage them to utilise current to the maximum degree in their operations.

Is it the position that the demand is inelastic, or is it the position that saturation point has been reached in the demand for electricity in this State? It is a well-known fact, of which I need hardly remind the Tánaiste, that, in other countries, where there is free competition in the electrical industry, these industries have to set out to sell electricity at a price that will induce consumers to use electricity to a greater extent.

With regard to the problems of production generally, the Government and Ministers have exhorted and even supplicated the interests concerned to produce more and to establish standards of greater productivity. Side by side with that, the Minister for Finance has told us that savings must be improved significantly. He has told us that he hopes savings will improve to a significant degree during the present year. I do not know whether that hope is fulfilled by the most recent figures available to him. It would seem to be the position that we are living in an age in which the trend is to consume the whole of the income and, perhaps, with the assistance of hire purchase, even more than the income. I do not know whether or not that is due to the fact that people feel that there is not the same necessity to save as there was in the past, that their old age will be provided for, their necessities in regard to health treatment well catered for.

One wonders if these factors have not created a deterrent, particularly in the case of those in employment, to the putting aside of something for the rainy day. It seems to be the belief now that it is only for amusement, holidays or pleasure that money should be set aside. It has been fairly well proved in Great Britain in respect to the nationalised industries that if the people employed in those industries and all the other millions of workers do not put some of their money back into industry it will not be possible for the industries to proceed and it is generally admitted that it will not be possible to have the standards that one would wish to have in respect to social welfare, health services and all the other amenities which the public purse has provided in recent years.

The principle of deferred pay was introduced during the war period, largely for the purpose of diminishing the inflationary pressure. If more money was spent on the smaller supply of goods available, it would simply force up prices. There was always the hope that the deferred pay would be invested either in public or private undertakings. We know that public investment has taken the lion's share of our capital expenditure in recent years and, in future, the capital requirements of private industry must receive more attention.

In the debates on the Estimates and other financial debates here during the year, the emphasis has been on State capital investment and the operations of State and semi-State bodies, but, as has been pointed out by Ministers, if we are to get into the export market, now that the requirements of the home market are well provided for, we shall have to equip our industries; we shall have to get the necessary technical skill and knowledge, management and equipment required to enable us to compete more satisfactorily with the increasingly severe trade competition in the markets to which we would like to export.

Automation, which has been introduced into Britain, seems to have been accepted by a great body of trade union opinion. I do not know whether or not it will be accepted in the long run, but we are led to believe that it is accepted, first, on the ground that eventually employment will be provided for all those at present employed, and more, and, since there is a shortage of manpower, that might seem to be justified; and, secondly, because the adoption of this modern method will lead to much higher standards of living and much higher remuneration and conditions for everybody in the long run.

There has been a production council in operation in England. In fact, there are several of them and the chairman of one of them is a Mr. Williamson; he was at one time chairman of the Trade Union Congress. If labour bodies and labour interests are brought directly into these production problems and if they are made to see the picture for themselves and have a certain degree of responsibility placed upon them in reaching decisions within the industries concerned, I have no doubt whatever that nothing but good will result.

I am glad that the Labour Court seems to be received now with more favour than was the case in the past. I am sure we are all agreed that that body has done splendid work during the ten years in which it has been in existence. We may not always approve of its decisions for one reason or another. In my own small way, I always told labour organisations on every opportunity that offered that they could always go back if conditions altered to their disadvantage, or if they were not satisfied with the awards made. There was never any question —and there need be no question if we keep our heads—of going back. But, if we are to go forward, such an advance demands full-scale co-operation by every one of us. It is because I believe that, in an examination of our present position and in planning for the future, it is necessary to have the most exact assessment and appreciation of the costings position, that I make the observations I am now offering.

I am also glad to see that management courses are being carried on. If the younger men in the smaller businesses can be given an opportunity of doing courses in the larger undertakings, I am sure that nothing but good will result. I believe there is to be an award for the satisfactory completion of a course in management. That is all to the good. It is very noticeable in relation to the plans which are being made in Great Britain that, in the expansion and improvement of facilities for technical training, greater emphasis is being placed on experience and practical knowledge, based on actual work in the factory. In fact, it seems to be part of the scheme that over a period of years a worker, who has the capacity in a subordinate post and who wants to advance himself to the higher scale executive grades, will be able to do sandwich courses, working most of the time in the factory and attending courses for perhaps four months of the year; and, after a period of five or six years, he will be granted a certificate in technology equivalent to, in the most advanced courses, a university degree and, in fact, likely to be more sought after and more valued than a good university degree.

I was glad to hear the Minister for Industry and Commerce state that he is to bring forward proposals with relation to apprenticeship. In Britain, there is a national advisory council to deal with this problem of technical training, as there is, I think, a national advisory council to deal with apprenticeship. There, again, if we had the co-operation of both employers and trade union organisations, and other bodies of that nature, I am sure that the problems of apprenticeship and technical training would be susceptible of solution and more progress would be made in making up arrears and in setting up higher standards of training for our workers.

In relation to experimental and research work under Bord na Móna, there is a grant-in-aid of £10,000. I think it would be better if industries financed their own research as far as possible; but if the Government could assure these individual industries or individual units of industry that they would be assisted in carrying out experimental and research work and that arrangements would be made for them to see what is being done in countries comparable with ours, such as Holland, Switzerland, or even Germany, that would be of considerable advantage.

The Minister for Industry and Commerce also referred to industrial consultants. The same considerations apply there. We ought to encourage every trained executive and every manager with technical experience and technical knowledge, and we should make them feel that there is a future for them here. The pressure of the draw is so great on our own nationals that it is extremely difficult to hold these men. I remember a distinguished university professor of science telling me that, although he was paid twice as much when working in another country, he felt he was happier and better off in Ireland. He, of course, held a university post. Whether that meant he had a much easier time than if he were carrying the responsibilities of management or scientific adviser in a modern factory is the question.

There can be no doubt, however, that in relation to a great many of our young men working in industry in England, an effort should be made to keep them together and have them interested in what is going on at home. Whenever the opportunity offers, even though that opportunity may involve an effort and a certain financial strain, we should get them back here in order to have their experience and knowledge. Very often, too, they might be in a position to contribute something in the way of helping to get investment here, which would be all to the good. One wonders whether we have that touch with our brethren across the water that we ought to have. It is not fair to expect the Embassy in London to keep in contact with all these thousands of people, but it is worth a special effort to do so. Whether we like it or not, many of our young people—many of them highly trained and educated and others of them ordinary workers who have gone into building or some other business and built themselves up—are there and it would be of the greatest advantage if they could be kept together in some movement of the Irish people in Great Britain.

The danger is that we may lose trace of these important professional and scientific elements and that the main effort will be to look after the newly arrived emigrants. That is, of course, very necessary. No social work could be more important, but I would like it if we could have some sort of association for our Irish people by which we could keep contact with them and those who have gone over from the universities ought to give the lead in that direction. They ought to give the lead and help to keep the Irish people together so that the day of integration, as it is called, may be kept as far away as possible. No matter how long they may be over there, we should try to make it so that they will still regard this country as their own and so that the links they have with it will be maintained. The links with the Government through associations of that kind, and links with industry, would be very important and very beneficial.

I was glad to see that the operations under the Undeveloped Areas Acts have been progressing and that good results have been shown. A large number of units have been started and we have been told that a total sum of about £3,000,000 has been invested. I hope that every assistance by way of advice and help will be given to the promoters of these industries. They have special problems in getting established in these areas. The early years are very trying and very painful at times. There is an amount of trial and error. I think it would be a very bad blow to our prestige, from the national point of view, if there was any substantial failure or any lack of success, or any question of these undertakings not reaching the standards of achievement that we had expected.

As regards these areas, I know that the fishing industry and the tweed industry are the two main activities upon which attention should be concentrated. Tourism is also important, and I agree that it will take a large period of years for An Tóstal to deliver the goods and before it is accepted as a normal activity by the people in the different towns and other areas in the country. One wishes that more attention could be given to the general question of cleaning up. An important British organisation is coming here—I think, this year or next year—and we would all like our country, and particularly our capital city, to look its best on that occasion.

I have referred to this matter already on the Board of Works Estimate. I do not think that anything could be of more value than to have a few hundred educated gentlemen, and their wives and families, representative of the universities, and of the outside world of learning and science, coming here. We could do with many more contacts of that nature. I hope that more will be done to remove any eye-sores there may be in the vicinity of our beauty spots, or of the historical monuments or buildings these people are likely to visit.

I notice that the Scottish motor coach industry, which is a great part of the Scottish tourist industry, is credited with bringing 100,000 visitors to Scotland each year. I know that there is great room for development in the tours which C.I.E. operate. The only question is whether there is the necessary equipment to deal with the large number of visitors. We would not want anybody who comes here on such a tour to be dissatisfied. Of course, if the weather is fine, they will be satisfied enough, but if the weather should happen not to be good, we would like to give these people every possible courtesy and care and attention.

The Minister referred here to our exports of tweed. I do not know what the prospects may be, but when you realise that the Scottish output of tweed is about 11,000,000 square yards, and that in a single year, they have increased the output by about 1,000,000 yards, not to speak of the huge income they get from the American market in respect of whisky, it shows that we have a great leeway to make up before we can produce figures comparable with these.

With Deputy Lemass, I regret that the Tánaiste was not able to give us more definite information about the oil refinery but, as it is a very important matter, I am sure that we are prepared to wait until he is. When he announced as far back as February, 1955, that the main principles for the establishment of the refinery had been agreed upon between the Government and the companies concerned——

I am afraid that the Deputy is falling into the same mistake Deputy Lemass fell into. No principles have been agreed upon, but the companies agreed in principle to establish a refinery here and were to submit proposals. Deputy Lemass stated that these proposals had been accepted by me. That is incorrect.

It is very important matter. I hope it will be successful and that it will be established in due course. It should be examined in the light of the general national interest. I understand there has been a change in the attitude. The Tánaiste will have seen the supplement to the Financial Times of yesterday dealing with this oil question.

As far as I understand, the establishment of oil refineries in Britain has been a post-war development. I think it was decided, in 1948, to go ahead with the development of refineries there. In May, 1950, the British Ministry of Fuel and Power stated that petroleum had been a major factor in determining the magnitude of the gold and dollar deficit in Britain's balance of payments. The situation was that, with the increasing use of petroleum, petrol and fuel oils, and the necessity which England, in common with other countries of Europe had, for making up for its lack of coal by the importation of fuel oils and furnace oils, it was found that this growing importation of oils from dollar sources was imposing a very heavy liability on them.

Later on, arrangements were made with American corporations—I think in 1951—by which a policy that had been embarked upon by the British of trying to substitute oil entirely produced by British companies overseas instead of dollar-produced oil, was altered in deference to the wishes, presumably, of these American finance companies, and an arrangement was come to by which they would continue their marketing of oil to England on the basis of reducing the dollar content in the prices of the oil. The purchase of crude oil and the refining of it in Europe has saved large sums, not alone to the countries concerned, but to these American-controlled corporations.

Similarly, of course, with the huge growth that has come in the imports of petroleum, and which has been more noticeable in the case of European countries in respect of fuel and furnace oils, there has been a very substantial increase in the value of imports from sterling sources. This is an important aspect of the matter which, I am sure, has had due consideration by the Government. It is a very important factor in view of the fact that we are part of the sterling area. The reserves of that area are our reserves. We partially own them and to that extent we are entitled to —I would not say consideration—but to have our say in decisions that are come to. If the objective is to save unnecessary burden and strain on the resources of the sterling area, it would seem only proper that we should get our share of any advantages that may arise from such steps as have been taken in building refineries in these islands.

Next to agriculture, this Estimate must be regarded as the most important in relation to the economy of this country. Speaking in those general terms, from my short knowledge of the workings of the Department of Industry and Commerce and the other Departments, I am inclined to think that the first necessity for the more efficient working of the various Departments in relation to the ultimate good they are to bring to the community is the necessity for greater dovetailing and better co-ordination in certain aspects of each.

Naturally, the Department of Industry and Commerce is subject to a degree of unwieldiness. It is so big and its ramifications are so extensive that phases of its activity throughout the country as a whole are very many indeed. Nevertheless, having regard to all that—the pecularities of a large Department and, if one may say it, the difficulties that are attendant on those pecularities—I think this is an excellent Department in so far as its staff and its administration generally are concerned. The Minister is to be congratulated not alone in his own right but on the part of his staff as well.

Personally, I have had very little experience of dealing directly with officials of the Department of Industry and Commerce, but whenever I had— and notably within the last year on one particular occasion—I must say that, not alone were the officials I met fully conversant with every aspect of their particular side of Irish industry, but to the deputation which I accompanied they imparted their knowledge with a courtesy that, if I might put it this way, made the receiving of knowledge by us easier than if it were given in a cold matter of fact way. I do not think I can put my praise of that particular branch of the Department on any higher level.

This Department has got, in addition to its own internal administrative machine, the various State bodies upon which, as it were, it must keep its eye. The principal ones are C.I.E., the E.S.B., Irish Shipping and some others. Of them, I would say that on general principles they would seem to work all right, but like every other group of people, whether they be bodies corporate or private individuals, these companies are no less subject to the temptation to be somewhat lavish in the expenditure of money which does not happen to be their own. In that respect I would say it is time, if not past time, that the whole question of our transport, both road and rail, should be examined, not alone with reference to possible savings but also with reference to greater efficiency and a better service because from a demonstration of greater efficiency and better service must inevitably come the confidence of the people in that service and, following that confidence, greater use of it with resultant profit to the country itself.

I think it was Deputy Davern of the Opposition Party who said he could not understand long distance buses running alongside the principal train routes. I must confess that I do not either but at the same time, having made that confession, I must further admit that I have no constructive proposal to make in regard, not so much as to how it is to be got over, as to how the situation can be remedied. Can one cut off the long distance buses altogether and possibly have the same amount of trains running or could one have, as it were, a criss-cross service of buses in the country districts leaving the long distance runs to the trains themselves or are we going to face a situation where passenger travel will be ultimately done by road, together with a great deal of freight traffic? The situation will have to be examined. It will have to be given the care and attention which any concern, even of lesser standing, would get in the circumstances in which we live trying to work out our economic salvation. In relation to C.I.E. the catering—let me put it this way—is not as well done as it might be.

That is a matter of administration under the company's control. The Minister has no power in that regard.

Very good, Sir. There is one aspect of the train services at the moment—it may be bad luck—and that is the frequency with which we have crashes or trains derailed recently. Our network of railways in contrast with other countries is very small and less complicated. I think that is something in which an active interest should be taken. The closest examination should be made of the circumstances in which these incidents occur.

It is all very well for people like Deputy Derrig in the course of a very exhaustive and, at times, constructive contribution to this debate, to use phrases like: "The Government should take steps to encourage the farming community and give incentives to the smaller men and have a dynamic approach." These phrases are all very palatable and nice to listen to but it would be much more interesting if we could hear from speakers who use them some details of the steps which could be taken to encourage the farming community, the kind of incentives other than those already given that should be given to the smaller man and what is the kind of approach other than the approaches made not alone by this Government but by other Governments which would come under the relevant description of "dynamic."

I, and I think those Deputies who might be described as being of the younger vintage in this House, have a feeling that progress in this country is being retarded to some extent—I do not know how much—by Parties who claim credit for something done. On the other hand if a Government happens to be doing something, the Opposition Party engages in tactics to frustrate whatever good might come of a particular scheme in operation at a particular time.

Reference was made to the results of taxation and to promises alleged to have been made by Deputies supporting the Government at the present time. I think Deputy Lemass made the all-in assertion that every Deputy in this House owes his election to some specific promise made during the course of the last general election. I hope I will be forgiven for delving somewhat into the past when I say—I am speaking personally—that I do not owe my election to any promise I made. In fact, I did not make any promise except one and that was to do my best, which I hope I am doing. I owe a great deal to the fact that I was elected to this House through the failure of a promise made in my constituency. I hasten to say that, while is was made by Deputy Lemass himself, it was made by him on the assurance of his local nabobs that his promise would be borne out by events. It was not borne out by events and, for good or ill, I am speaking here this evening as a result.

From the particular aspect of the workings of the Department of Industry and Commerce and what each particular constituency can expect from a Minister or from a Department, I come now to deal with the contribution in this House by Deputy Calleary on Thursday last. He is recorded as speaking in Volume 158, No. 6 of the Official Report, dated 21st June, 1956. The speech begins at column 844. The whole tenor of his contribution to this debate is one of gloom. I hasten to say it is not the gloom felt by Deputy Calleary personally but the gloom which, for Party propaganda purposes in the constituency of North Mayo, he is trying to create in this House having indulged in it for two months prior to making his contribution last Thursday. He spoke at column 844 on what I hope will be the last occasion for caoining for what might be described as his lost directors of the grass meal scheme at Glenamoy.

For the first time a new assertion is made in relation to the position of that particular production and that was the result of the Tánaiste's visit to the area. Anybody who has been watching the Order Paper here from week to week or who has been sufficiently interested over the past few months to notice it will have seen that Deputy Calleary has been tabling questions in relation to power stations at Bangor Erris and Bellacorick, questions based either on suspicion or information— suspicion well-founded or information which he should not have had. All of these questions and the answers thereto were his build-up to bring about an atmosphere in relation to these particular works that could only create discontent and give the men working there a feeling of uncertainty so that they might be tempted to leave the particular work or go away to England or elsewhere—not that Deputy Calleary would worry about such a man losing his livelihood in Bangor Erris, Glenamoy, Bellacorick or anywhere else but because, by the creation of that kind of atmosphere of gloom and despondency, he might be able, upon the broken homes and despondent hearts, to improve the Fianna Fáil situation in the North Mayo constituency.

At column 846, he is reported as saying:—

"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."

In his meanderings around the constituency of North Mayo, either in a political capacity disseminating political propaganda or in an official capacity as an appointed officer of the Department of Local Government under the Housing Acts, or a combination of both, Deputy Calleary cannot have failed to see increased Land Commission work all over that area. He cannot have failed to see the increased work by the Forestry Branch of the Department of Lands in different places. He cannot have failed to see a greater labour content at Glenamoy where the Departments of Agriculture and Lands are now combining in an effort to give far greater employment, with more beneficial results, than grass meal ever could.

At the same column, Deputy Calleary continued:—

"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."

At the beginning of his speech, Deputy Calleary said the people of his area would read with dismay the statement of the Minister and that he wished to enter a strong protest with regard to the proposed slowing-down of the work at the power station at Bellacorick. If the people are going to read anything with dismay they will certainly read of the newly-found anxiety of Deputy Calleary for the town of Ballina with more than cynical amusement.

I can tell this House, and from this House I can tell the people of North Mayo, that, for the past two months— while Deputy Calleary was going around the constituency creating an atmosphere of despondency and discontent—the Government have been devoting their full energies and directing their will and giving the greatest possible consideration to the people who are working at the particular stations in my constituency. I want not alone this House but the people of my constituency to judge which is the better thing—to make earnest representations to the people to whom they should be made and try to get the best possible results for your people or to go around creating despondency, discontent and gloom in households. I am quite sure the people will judge between these two things and will indicate their view when they are given an opportunity to do so.

Deputy Calleary also wants to know if the Minister has any information regarding mineral exploration and development in Mayo. I can remember the good old days prior to the advent of Fianna Fáil to power in 1932. I can remember the speeches made in my own barony of Erris. I can remember speeches made near Achill Sound. The then aspirants to political representation in the constituencies of both North and South Mayo would point to the hills ranging from Glenamoy to Curraune and Achill and say to the people: "When we get to power, when we get control of the destinies of this country, you will not recognise Curraune Hill from mine shafts." Now, in 1956, there is a new anxiety on the part of Deputy Calleary for mineral exploration. He knows perfectly well that part of the area of North Mayo is an area from which there is migration as well as emigration. I want to place on record my tribute to the men and women of North Mayo—and that tribute could well be paid to the men and women of Donegal and other congested areas—for relieving our economy over so many years by getting support for themselves and their families through migration and seasonal employment at great hardship to themselves and coming back, even in the middle of it, to attend to the harvest at home.

Unlike Deputy Calleary and those who went before him, I always said to the people: "I have not come to ask for your votes on the basis that I will stop you from going to England or Scotland. I want you to know that until a suitable and adequate alternative is procured for you or is placed at your disposal I will do nothing that would interfere with the market you have for your labour." It is very specialised labour. English farmers clamour for the professional expertness and efficiency with which the men from my part of the country can handle farming on British farms. Some of them go to the same farm every year. If they were treated at home by people who have employment to give on the same basis both in housing and remuneration as they are treated across the water, the people of this country who have employment to give on their farms would be able to get very good men indeed.

Let us even at this stage of our career throw off the Davy Crockett outfits and cease treating the people of this country as if they were little children ready to swallow every piece of propaganda that can be created for them and distributed with the greatest speed and efficiency. Let us become realists, let us all make our contribution as a contribution, and not as something that is meant to destroy, to dampen people's spirits, to break their wills, and to destroy their hopes.

There are things in this country, as in every other country, upon which men of goodwill can come together and on which men of goodwill of every Party, be it Government or Opposition, can go through their constituencies and say: "This is a good thing; take full advantage of it." Far too frequently have we had it happen here, particularly from the Opposition, in relation to various schemes, that the people were advised not to touch them. I myself know of concrete instances where people were advised not to take any part in the land project in case——

Discussion of the land project does not arise on the Estimate for Industry and Commerce.

It arises, with respect, by way of an example of the type of thing to which I am referring.

Reference has been made in the course of this debate to our people abroad who have gone into the building and other trades in England and it has been suggested that they should be kept together. They are being kept together in three excellent ways in England and in Scotland. In one way, we have the Irish Club and akin to it the National University of Ireland Club and other such clubs all over London and in the provinces which are purely social clubs. There are others—and I am glad to say they are on the increase—started by the local clergy, who are mainly Irish, in the different centres, which combine social and spiritual values. Thirdly— probably my enumeration is not in order of merit—there are the anti-Partition League branches all over England. If the anti-Partition League branches all over England never accomplished anything except to keep their organisation together and preserve the Irish spirit and Irish tradition, they may not solve the question of Partition as soon as we would wish, but they will keep our people out of organisations in England and Scotland which would be to the detriment of Irish tradition and our spiritual and social upbringing.

The Minister for Industry and Commerce has no responsibility for the welfare of migratory workers.

I had rather thought that when Deputy Derrig was allowed to discourse at length on the question of migratory workers that I would at least be allowed to make my contribution.

I did not mention migratory workers——

The Chair did not hear Deputy Derrig refer to what the Deputy has stated, to migratory workers abroad.

Tourism, I think, can be dealt with very simply in this country or in any other country. The first essential for a successful tourist industry in any country is cleanliness of houses and of food. After cleanliness comes imagination in the preparation of food. Nobody who goes abroad and visits countries which have a tourist outlook can fail to be impressed by the many different ways in which food is served up. We always seem to serve it in the one way. To make our country look better, I think money could be saved by devoting, say, some of the money that is spent on unemployment assistance to providing work even for one day a week for men in our villages and towns in removing derelict houses and dead walls, and in doing a bit of white-washing with greater regularity. Again, if I might come back to it, I think the E.S.B. could do a good deal for the West of Ireland by rushing rural electrification into every village, thus hastening all the kindred amenities that follow from rural electrification.

I think those are the simple matters we need—clean, good houses, good food immaculately presented. We should get rid of the derelict houses and dead walls; have clean streets and make the country distinctive in paying attention to the hygienic aspect of tourism.

Regarding references that have been made to saving, there is no doubt that nowadays the attitude of the people to savings has changed. Somebody has said that people now seem to save only for holidays instead of for the rainy day—I think it was Deputy Derrig who said that. Quite recently, I was amazed to see posters—I think it was in Ballina Post Office—displaying alluring beaches and with equally alluring habitués with the caption: "Save and make possible your holidays abroad." I do not know whether it was An Bord Failte or whether it was the post office, but to whomever was responsible for it I would say that there are places in this country where, if you wish to accept it in the real holiday sense, you can have as good a holiday from the point of view of scenery and of food— with the possible exception of weather —as you can have anywhere else in the free countries of Western Europe.

In conclusion, I wish to congratulate yourself and your Department, not so much for any over-joyful tidings that you have brought, but mainly for the realistic approach and the courage to speak of things as they are, so that we can go back to our constituencies and talk about this Estimate and talk about your statement, Sir——

The Deputy means the Minister's statement.

The Minister's statement. It could not possibly be construed that I was talking about anybody else's statement.

It is the practice in this House to address the Chair.

I am sorry if I have departed from the rules of the House. It was not my intention to do so and I regret it very much and I apologise to the Chair. We can go back, as I was saying, to our constituencies throughout the country and tell our people that the approach of the Minister for Industry and Commerce and of his Department is a realistic one, one full of courage in tackling the problems that cannot be regarded as meagre or slight and that, in these difficult times, this Department is being shepherded with courage and foresight.

Judging by the remarks of the previous speaker, there must be very definite gloom settling over Mayo. One does not like to see such gloom over the country, but I am glad to know that the people on the opposite side at least realise it is there. There must, of course, be gloom in the country because of what has been happening during the past couple of years. When one compares the position at the time of the 1954 general election and what the people were promised they would get with what they find they have got, is it any wonder there should be gloom without anybody on this side saying anything?

It is a natural consequence of what has been happening over the past two years. In his report this year, the Minister for Industry and Commerce does not show a very happy position. There is very little in his report to show what could be called progress. Take the position as regards employment. Even allowing for the natural increases we have had in industry, employment has gone down. Employment has been reduced very substantially in the year under review. When we look at the other side of the picture and look at the figures for unemployment, and emigration linked with it, we all know from our personal knowledge the serious position that exists.

At one time, the Minister himself used to wax very hot in this House about the failure of Fianna Fáil to deal with those two problems. He has been two years in office now and the position is worse than ever. As the figures for the recent census show, even Dublin is suffering severely from emigration. We know that, but a lot of the country people do not believe it yet. In my own constituency, I know several young families who have emigrated in the past 12 months. I know of workers in the past few weeks who have been knocked off employment Friday after Friday. It is a regular thing in Dublin and elsewhere, week after week, not only in the building trade, but in other trades as well. Some of them take the boat the night they become unemployed, because there is no prospect of alternative employment. Why would there not be gloom in such circumstances?

What is being done to try to deal with that situation? I can see no special effort being made. Of course, we have not now got demonstrations of unemployed men lying on O'Connell Bridge and holding up dinner-hour traffic as we had in our time when the position was not nearly so bad. We do not descend to that kind of thing, but the figures and facts, and what the people know from their own personal experience, are teaching a bigger lesson than such demonstrations ever did.

On the question of prices, the Tánaiste and other people opposite told us some years ago, when we were in office, that we did not know how to control prices, that we were not even trying to control prices. They said they had a system which would work wonders, that they would show we were not even making an effort. But what has been done? Nothing. The Tánaiste has actually thrown in the sponge as he did on Supplies and Services; he is not even going to bring in the Bill he promised. Of course he would not bring in the Bill he found in his office on appointment because it was a Fianna Fáil Bill. He said he would bring in a Bill of his own. Now he says he will not bring in any Bill.

That situation is like many others created by the Coalition—a lot of talk about things being under consideration and then no decision arrived at, or at least a decision to do nothing. The same position applies to price control. Nothing has been done, and prices are going up now as quickly as ever. Prices have gone up ten times in the past two years, in spite of all the promises made to deal with them. Most of it is due to internal causes. They cannot say that the Korean war is causing these price increases. Some of them may be due to outside economic effects, but the bulk of them, when you examine the figures, are due to internal causes.

If this had happened when Fianna Fáil were in office I know what we would be hearing. Then it would be something that could be dealt with, though one could honestly say it could not. I have no hope—of course I never had any hope—that any real effort will be made to deal with this situation.

There is one reduction shown in this Estimate, that is, the reduction in relation to Mianraí Teoranta, which, as far as I can see, is to lose the whole fund for further exploration. In view of the developments that have taken place during the past year in Avoca, badly off as we may be, I think it is very unwise to stop further mineral exploration in the country. If something good has been found, something better may be found. While I do not agree at all with the manner in which the Avoca mining concern has been set up and the arrangements made, I think it is a big thing that we have found that such minerals are there. It is quite possible there are other areas in which equally important deposits might be found. It is very unwise to cut out completely this sum of £40,000 this year in order that no further work of that nature will be done. The E.S.B. is now claiming a further increase in charges. I hope the Minister will exercise the powers he has very stringently in dealing with that application. In the last few years, there has been a surplus of well over £1,000,000 in their accounts; there was a surplus of £233,000 in 1953-54 and of £883,000 in 1954-55. If any body could bring about some sort of stabilisation at the moment, it is the E.S.B., with the decrease in coal consumption that has taken place and the large increase in the use of native fuel. That charge and the surplus over the last few years should enable them to carry on without a further increase in charges for some time, until we see how things develop. The Minister, at column 90, Volume 152, of the Official Debates of 5th July, 1955, referring to the charges said:—

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

Further on, at column 96 of the same volume, he said:—

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

In view of the Minister's statement, in view of the financial position of the board over the past few years and its general financial position, he should exercise his powers very stringently in regard to the case that is made to him. Furthermore, if the contention that was made on the other side of the House is true, that the figures were poked in the previous Minister's eyes by the E.S.B., the present Minister ought to be more on his guard in respect of any case that is put up.

I am glad to see that steps are being taken by Bord na Móna to increase the supply of briquettes. We must remember, of course, that the capital cost of any new station to make briquettes will be far higher than that of the station they have been already working from, which they got for a song, as the saying goes. Nevertheless, they should be able to produce briquettes at a reasonable price. I know there is an unsatisfied demand for them in Dublin. I get them myself every year, but last year I found them very hard to procure. I believe there is a market for them and I am very glad to hear that Bord na Móna are proceeding to build new factories.

I hope that before we are much older we will hear from the Minister that steps will be taken to deal with the chronic questions of unemployment and emigration, because they are chronic all over the country, and even in the City of Dublin.

Before I proceed with my own contribution to the debate, I should like to make reference to a few statements made by Deputy Derrig. Deputy Derrig seemed to be following the old Party line on wheat. He referred with almost as much gloom as Deputy Colley, to the fact that we were importing £5,000,000 worth of wheat. He neglected to state that we have used the maximum quantity of native wheat it is possible to use in the mix from which we manufacture our flour right up to the present time, and that in last year's harvest, we got as much wheat as Fianna Fáil said we could eat. He also neglected to say that the Cabinet of which he was a member decided that the amount of native wheat we could assimilate into our bread was 300,000 tons and that even last harvest there was delivered to the mills more than that quantity. Therefore, it was rather, shall we say, a political whim that made Deputy Derrig make his statement in that regard.

That is dried wheat.

Certainly it is dried wheat, but if the Deputy looks at the figures, he will know what I am saying is correct. Because of last year's harvest, we were able to meet all our requirements and, in fact, there was a small surplus carried over from 1954 which it is hoped to assimilate by using an extra quantity of Irish wheat, more Irish wheat than has been used in the mix since wartime. It is hoped to assimilate this small surplus because of the excellent quality of Irish wheat as a result of the good harvest God sent us last year.

Similarly, Deputy Derrig neglected to state, when he referred to this reduction of £716,000, that this reduction was made much larger by the fact that in the wheat harvest, which has reference to the previous Estimate to this one, the Minister for Agriculture, because of the wet weather, made a concession which meant as much as 12/- a barrel to farmers. That increased the price of wheat, thus increasing the gap to that figure of £716,000, the concession being at the time calculated to cost the Exchequer £350,000. These are relevant figures, not political figures. They can be checked in the Dáil Library, and I do not think Deputy Derrig was ignorant of them. As an ex-Minister and an ex-member of the Cabinet that made the decision to which I refer, I am quite certain Deputy Derrig was well aware of all these figures when he made this statement on wheat.

An air of gloom seems to envelop everything, even the housing problems of the Dublin Corporation. These declarations of woe which have been enunciated by Deputy Colley and, I am sure, will be enunciated by every other Fianna Fáil Deputy, are detrimental in principle and completely detrimental to the economy of the country. It is obvious that there is a problem. Every country this side of America has a problem—and America may have some problems too—and this is not the time to go out saying: "Woe is me," when in fact it is not quite so bad at all.

The highest figure ever registered in industrial employment was registered this year at a time when, in similar circumstances, the Deputies opposite might have been introducing what would have been tantamount to another 1952 Budget, which put so many people out of employment. The fact that in our years of problems we succeeded in registering the highest ever figure of industrial employment is no mean achievement. It was rather futile of Deputy Colley to produce this argument that the natural increase had not gone up. If he looks at the graph, if there is a graph, he will see that there is no such thing as a natural increase.

I should like to refer to the position in the bakery trade outside Dublin. From contacts I have with it and from friends I have in that trade and certain knowledge that I have picked up, I can see that it is in a pretty bad way. They face competition from the large bakeries in Dublin, with lesser costs of production. There is a peculiarly interlaced set-up between the milling and baking trade in Dublin and the larger bakeries, and it is questionable and a matter for serious consideration for the Department of Industry and Commerce whether the present system of subsidising flour is, in fact, reacting unfavourably against decent bakeries outside Dublin who are employing a higher level of labour in the production of their bread than those larger bakeries in Dublin.

I am sure that Deputies know that the position in the flour milling trade is, that each mill has a quota of wheat to mill and that some have difficulties in selling that quota. Obviously, the mills which are also bakeries will have considerable difficulties in making sales of flour to other bakeries who might be regarded as competitors. To negative that, large millers in Dublin became bakers many years ago, and when, in fact, the system of subsidising wheat and of subsidising flour was introduced, the future became brighter for them because they were larger millers than anybody else, selling their flour at approximately the same price. They have, therefore, a greater opportunity for profit since the subsidy paid to these mills is based on the average loss on Irish wheat in mills throughout the country and their production costs are naturally less than those of the smaller mills. They used the extra profits over the years to enlarge their baking business, because, as years went by, it became harder to sell flour, and as the licences issued to them to get a subsidy, on a fixed amount of native wheat, would in fact, be reduced if they did not continue to mill it, it became highly profitable for them to bake their own flour and sell it as bread. These gentlemen have expenses which must become interrelated. There must be lorries which at one time or another are engaged in the movement of wheat. These lorries will again be used, possibly the next day, in the movement of flour in the bakeries and in other baking activities.

In the system of accounting, these large mills which are also bakeries can then in fact produce a balance sheet to the Department of Industry and Commerce which shows them to have the average cost of producing and baking of flour. If they are more efficient than the smaller flour mills, they are in a better position. They may be in a position to produce their bread cheaper because of the subsidy they gain on their flour and to sell this bread in Monaghan, Louth, Westmeath and everywhere within driving distance of Dublin, as far as the provinces of Connacht and Munster. These Dublin baker-millers now place in complete jeopardy bakers in provincial towns like Drogheda and Dundalk, some of them employing as many as 80 or 100 men.

I do say that it is something the Minister should face up to and examine in a sympathetic manner, with the knowledge that these men are decent men and that they are being prejudiced in their employment by the activities of large bakeries in what I regard as a measure of unfair competition.

There is also the matter of the increase in remuneration given to bakery employees. I understand that, as a result of that increase, there was an application for either an increase in the price of bread or a decrease in the price of bakers' flour which, of course, would result in a greater loss to the Exchequer. I understand that a commission inquired into this matter and that a further commission is at present inquiring into it. To my knowledge, there are bakers in provincial towns who are losing very considerable sums of money while the commission sits and I would urge the Minister to try to finalise the matter as soon as possible.

We have heard quite a lot of criticism from the opposite side of the House about the fact that the Minister went on an American visit. I think he was right to go on an American visit. This is not the time when we may expect a great expansion in business in the British and imperial parts of the world. They have much greater financial difficulties than the Americans have. If the Minister sought a sphere in which he could urge the expansion of Irish industry, that sphere seemed to be, in the year 1955-56, the American sphere. Perhaps, in 1960-61, it may be good business to go elsewhere.

I do not know what concrete results have flowed from the Minister's visit as yet. In my view, he went to the right place, he did the right thing, he made his effort, and his effort should not be decried by an Opposition because anybody outside this country who seeks to come in and who is big enough to come in will take cognisance of what is said in this House, of views expressed by an Opposition and by a Government. Efforts of that kind by any Minister should have the unanimous approval of the House.

The Minister stated here, either immediately on his return or before he went, that he had no desire to exclude the possibility of British industrialists coming here to set up industries. I think his words were that all he asked of the British envoy here was that he should produce a list as long as his arm and he would do his best for him. That is the proper approach. I do think the Minister was right. Whether the concrete results come immediately or in the future, I think they will come and that the Minister did the right thing in going to America and criticism should not be forthcoming from the opposite side of the House.

Finally, I should like to say that the time has come when those industries that were established over the last few decades, which are largely supply industries, industries that supply articles of apparel and articles used by the people of this country, are at this stage sufficient for our requirements, and that there are not many industries of that sort left that can be expanded. The real opportunity lies in the establishment of industries which would depend for their raw material on agriculture or on some product of the soil of Ireland. A wood pulp industry comes to mind in that connection. There are those who say, and who are very competent to say, that the time is coming when there will be sufficient thinnings from our young forests to provide the raw material for such an industry. Statistics show that the establishment of such an industry would be of immense benefit, that we are importing colossal quantities of wood pulp which we could produce here if we had the raw material. We must proceed on those lines. It is industries that are based on agriculture, the raw materials for which are produced in this country, and derived from Irish soil, that will in future make the expansion of our industrial arm possible.

I wish the Minister every success. I hope it will be possible to continue the debate without attempts to score political points and that the Minister, in his honest effort to develop our industrial arm, will have the good wish of every Deputy.

The wide field of the debate on the Estimate for the Department of Industry and Commerce contains many matters in which Deputies are interested. I do not propose dealing with all of them but I should like to deal with the specific few which apply in particular to the rural areas. Let me say with regard to the overall pattern of the debate, particularly in relation to the Minister's opening statement, that the product of Irish industries generally is accepted as being as good as, and in many cases better than, foreign imported products. I was not a member of this House at a time when that happy position did not obtain, when, on the Estimate for the Department of Industry and Commerce, each year in this House, strong views were expressed with regard to people who were accused of sheltering under the tariff umbrella and when in the country there was prejudice against Irish manufactured goods, a prejudice which dies hard and is not yet extinct in some cases. There are still some people who clamour for the imported article in the belief that, if it is not exclusive, it is in some way superior to the home product.

I remember, as an outsider, watching with interest the progress of the industrial drive which started in 1932. One cannot help recalling the amount of opposition or antipathy that was whipped up against the efforts which were then being made to encourage Irish people to put money into Irish industry. Prior to the country attaining the measure of freedom which it secured in 1916 to 1921, a selected few were interested in Irish industry from purely and solely patriotic motives. In addition, there were a few powerful industries which had survived even the blast of dumping from outside. Fortunately, these are still with us and are big employers. There was a small group of industrialists here who were prompted by purely patriotic reasons. Their products were purchased only by patriotic people, some of whom have since given their all for the freedom of the country. That was the picture up to 1932, when the industrial drive began in earnest.

Some time ago I was reading extracts from the report of the Tariff Commission which sat some time after the first Twenty-Six County Government was instituted. The findings of that commission resulted in a decision which was the most prejudicial, most damaging and most detrimental to the future development of this country that there could be. Many of the industries, which were already well established and which were not afraid of any blast from outside and not interested in the field of competition, did not appear before the commission to give evidence. Others gave evidence of an adverse nature regarding the future development of industry in this country. The small group of patriotic industrialists who appeared before the commission and who strongly advocated protection were like a voice crying in the wilderness.

The findings and report of the Tariff Commission could have no other effect but that which must be anticipated by anybody who reviews the evidence given before it, remembering the source from which that evidence was derived. Now a certain prejudice was inculcated into the people who would be likely to have an interest in industrial development and who had the wherewithal to create such development. That prejudice was not easily broken down. Unfortunately, while the prejudiced were few in number, their sentiments found expression in the minds of a large section of our people all too prone to copy what they regarded as the "Upper Ten" or more superior section of the community.

The industrial drive began in 1932. It was not infrequently that one came up against a certain derision of that drive from quarters from which one least expected it. The drive was denigrated, the quality of the goods derided. If new industrialists were able to pay a dividend of anything up to 10 per cent. after a few years' operation, they were labelled as extortionists at the expense of the people. It was said that the people were exploited by these industrialists sheltering behind the protection of tariff walls.

Time has proved the fallacy of that attitude and to-day all sections of the community are agreed that our industrialists can produce commodities as good as, and in many cases superior to, the imported article. It was no easy road to arrive at that situation. The confidence of the people in home-manufactured articles had to be built up. Those who had the necessary finances had to be encouraged to invest in industry here. Mutual understanding between workers and management had to be evolved. The drive has succeeded and it is now our function to consider on this Estimate each year how best that drive can be accelerated and how far the scope of production can be expanded.

I have not listened to many of the speeches so far on this Estimate and I am not sure what the attitude of the Government is. I listened to the Minister's opening statement and, from that, it would appear that he is satisfied with the progress that is being made. I am not. We have now reached the stage wherein the only matters for consideration are the expansion of our present industrial arm and the acceleration of that expansion. I do not think we have reached the stage at which one can be satisfied with the rate of progress. More jobs must be provided in industry.

If one were to set up a commission to inquire into the economic problem of emigration and unemployment, there is only one report which such a commission could issue, namely, that more employment must be provided by an accelerated expansion in industry. No matter how well we may develop our agricultural arm, there will always be a surplus of labour. It should not be impossible to absorb that surplus. In fact, it is not impossible. The main concern of those of us who represent the western seaboard is the ebbing tide of population from that area towards the east coast and the grave necessity for providing some industrial development in those areas to arrest the flow of population. That is an aspect which gravely concerns me and other Deputies representing the western seaboard.

It concerns us in the south-west, too.

The Undeveloped Areas Act, introduced by Fianna Fáil, met with a certain amount of criticism. I suppose it is only natural that political Parties will at times try to score political points. But an altogether unnecessary amount of cold water was poured upon that genuine effort to improve conditions in the undeveloped areas in the West. Many of the more responsible Deputies then in opposition voiced the hope that the Act would be a success and agreed that it would bring about the desired results. It has not brought about the results I hoped or anticipated at the time. I remember expressing the hope then that the Act would meet with some measure of success and that, if it did not bring the measure of success we anticipated, it would at least prove to be a positive attempt towards the amelioration of one of our gravest social and economic problems.

We are now about halfway through the period stipulated in the Act for the development of these areas along the western seaboard. A sum of £2,000,000 was provided under the Act; £1,000,000 has already been allocated. If I remember correctly, the cessation of the Act is envisaged in 1958. We will then have an opportunity of reviewing the whole problem. We can then review the question of the decentralisation of industry.

Those of us who have studied this matter have gleaned much useful information and experience in the operation of the Undeveloped Areas Act and we will be in a position then, I hope, to bring into operation an even better scheme and make a better attempt, by more practicable legislation perhaps, at tackling this problem of the decentralisation of industry with greater hopes of success. The allocation of £1,000,000 is no mean achievement. I am only sorry that the £2,000,000 has not been expended. The provisions of the Act were so wide I thought the entire resources would be called upon in the first two years. Possibly that was too much to hope for. Certainly the hope did not materialise. Sufficient call has been made on the resources placed at the disposal of potential industry under that Act to warrant its continuance in an even more progressive form.

An Foras Tionscal have been very careful in their dealings when projects have been put before them. I would not say they have been too meticulous although many people have already said that they are. Outsiders have gone away with the impression that it is too difficult to get a scheme through that body but it is better to err in the right direction. It is better to set up projects that are likely to remain rather than schemes that will fade with the first unfavourable wind. I think Foras Tionscal has been right in being rather meticulous in regard to this question. Any project that is placed before them is examined in the greatest detail, and, while there may be some delay, it is better that that should be so in regard to any project offered to them under the Undeveloped Areas Act.

When this matter comes to be reviewed many problems will have revealed themselves, the experience of which will be of benefit to those whose job it will be to extend this legislation. One of the things that are happening with regard to industries along the western seaboard and, which at some time will require the attention of the Legislature, is the removal of the native industries from those areas. It is a pity that industries which belong to the western seaboard should be allowed to drift towards the centre of the market. I speak of such industries as tweed, knitwear and other industries which I consider are native to the congested areas and belong to those areas. Even though by tradition, and proximity of the raw material, they belong to the congested areas, the tendency now is to be near the centre of the market with the result that these industries are now finding themselves in the large centres of population, particularly this capital city. Some effort should be made to prevent those industries becoming centralised.

Apart from the fact that they are anxious to be near the central market and the shop window of the country, so to speak, there is also the question of the raw materials on which these industries are based being produced now in the large centres of population. All the products for these industries, which belong to the western seaboard, and which were established before decentralisation became a problem, are now being produced in the capital itself, far away from the western seaboard. I would like to see all the spinning mills and other industries, which provide the raw materials for the industries to which I refer, compelled to have their centres based on the undeveloped areas. Our problem is not merely the question of getting industrialists to move into the congested areas but we shall also be faced with the problem of preventing the industries which we always had from moving into the larger centres of population.

The provisions of the Undeveloped Areas Act are generous but they could go much further. It should be possible to give wider concessions to decentralised industries in relation to income-tax and the allowance for depreciation of machinery, such as the slight relief given in the Budget this year. If there was a distinction, and a more favourable margin, given to industries in the decentralised as against the centralised area it would be a further incentive. I have often discussed this matter with members of industrial concerns who have weighed up the pros and cons and the advantages and disadvantages of starting industries in the congested areas. These people consider the amount of money they will get under the Act. They may get the total cost of erecting and building their factory, which is a considerable amount, plus 50 per cent. of the cost of the machinery. Yet the difference in cost which faces an industry sending out its finished product from the centre, as compared with that of an industry operating in Cork or Donegal, the extra cost of transport, is sufficient to wipe out the benefit of any grant that may be received on the establishment of the industry.

Any person going into the figures will find that, in many cases, the amount of the grant would be nullified by the extra transport charges over a period of five or six years. However generous the provisions of the Act may be, they do not contain sufficient incentive to get the hard headed industrialists to move to the western seaboard. It may be necessary, at some future time, to provide more generous facilities, or some other incentive, by way of greater reliefs or allowances in respect of income-tax, or by way of subsidy of transport charges, that would operate over a continuous period, in order to get people to move their industries back into the congested areas.

It is a very poor incentive to point out that labour may be found at a cheaper rate in these areas. We have thousands of people who, although they are working for very high wages in Birmingham, Coventry and London, are always prepared to come back home and work for half the amount if they can find a job at home. If we could provide thousands of workers of that type, it would still be a very poor incentive to say to industrialists that we could give them cheaper labour than they could obtain in Dublin or elsewhere. We believe if industry is to be established, it should be established on the right lines and wages should be paid which would be appropriate for the area in which it is established, so that the worker might have the necessary interest to make a success of his job.

Backbenchers like myself speaking here are not likely to have much influence on what the Minister will do in the future, but at least we should use this occasion to voice our opinions. If I were to select any particular point from the comprehensive opening statement of the Minister—because of the diversity of the Department's work it had to be comprehensive—my emphasis would be on this problem of decentralisation of industry. We should seriously get down to that problem and bring about greater amelioration of the present situation. When speaking on another Estimate here I said we should make up our minds now as to whether we could look forward to keeping those families in the backward areas or allow them to go away. There are people who say to-day that those areas were never intended for bringing up families. Yet hundreds of families were reared there in the past, and those of us who know the conditions in those areas can say that a very fine type of Irishman and Irishwoman was reared in the small cabins in the backward areas of the western and north-western seaboard. Indeed, they might be termed the cream of the manhood and womanhood of this country.

Are we to throw in the sponge and say we cannot keep our people in those areas and that nothing should be done to prevent the unnecessary accumulation of population in this city and other cities throughout the country? Many of the people who come here go into unproductive employment and are attracted by the better social amenities which exist here. That is not a healthy sign of our economy and it is something which should not be condoned by those of us in a position to do something about it or to bring it to the notice of those who can. A real healthy economy will make for an increase in population in the homesteads of the western seaboard. In that area the finest type of people were reared in the past—people who distinguished themselves abroad when, through economic circumstances, they were forced to seek their livelihood elsewhere. We should not throw in the sponge and say those areas were not intended to accommodate such numbers of people and that nothing can be done to keep the people there.

Recently, I was surprised to hear the statement of an important official from a certain statutory corporation in this country who went out from this city to do a survey in a certain area. He was trying to create the impression that it would be absolutely impossible to have any development in the area and he said to some of the interested parties: "Do you think that God ever intended people to live over on the side of that hill? Would it not be better for them to go away and work in England for eight or ten months of the year and come back home to their families for a couple of months?" I am afraid we have many people in responsible positions supposed to be tackling this problem who are not in any way conversant with it or competent to understand and appreciate what the problem really is. I would like that that whole question would be studied on the spot by people who are familiar with the problem and who have a real appreciation of it. I do not want to go any further on that and I mention it merely by way of making known a suspicion in the areas concerned that the people whose duty it is to formulate schemes of industrial development in those areas are not really sincere in their promotion of them.

Getting away from the point of the undeveloped areas, I want to say something about E.S.B. development. But, in talking about that, I am not really getting away from the problem of the undeveloped areas, because rural electrification was the greatest boon ever to come to those areas. It has literally and metaphorically brought the light to areas where people previously never knew what a great amenity it is. But we are disappointed in the E.S.B. In the Minister's opening statement, he said there was a slowing down in the rate of progress. We know why there has been a decline. It is because the charges are too high.

Compare the cost of rural electricity to-day with the cost of electricity in the City of Dublin and other urban areas. You will find that this great amenity of rural electrification, however expensive it may be in capital development, is being given to the people at far too high a price. Those who are getting it at the normal charge are finding it too costly, but what about the unfortunate person who has to pay the special charge because he happens to be a few hundred yards off the beaten track so that an existing transformer cannot be utilised in providing his supply?

On the edge of every scheme we have those people to whom the board says: "If you want to have your house connected with the E.S.B. current, you must pay the extra charge which is necessitated because you are too far away from the nearest transformer. It would not be economical to have a special transformer connected for one or two houses." Many people are deprived of the current and may be deprived of it for all time, even at the normal rate, which is too high, for the simple reason that they are not immediately within a development area. If the E.S.B., which is a non-profit making corporation, had taken the proper view of the whole scheme of development in rural areas, they would have said that, irrespective of where a house was, they would take the bad with the good and give all the same rate of charge.

The fixed charge arrived at by means of measuring the floor area is not an equitable charge. For some houses it may not work out so badly, but it may have serious effects in the case of houses where people do not use the current very much. It is not a fair charge and it should be reviewed. The Minister should undertake to have this matter examined in the light of the fact that the E.S.B. have made a substantial profit in recent years while they are yet in the middle of a very heavy development programme.

I was sorry—I do not want to use this for any political purposes—when the Minister withdrew the subsidy from the rural electrification section of the board and did not say to them at the time: "Now that you are able to carry on on your own, we want you to use the subsidy for the purpose of bringing down the charges to people already connected." That would have been one of the greatest things the Minister could have done for a very large section of the community. Not only would we have been in a position to report that progress was being accelerated at a rate unforeseen, but we would probably be in a position to say that the number of people engaged in the development of rural electrification was twice as much as it is. Instead, according to the Minister in this debate, we have to report that a significant decline is now noticeable in E.S.B. development.

That is rather bad at a time when the country is crying out for employment and when employment is there in plenty for good capital development. Three times the number of squads could be used in extending rural electrification to the many areas clamouring for it, if it could only be given at an economic figure. That is a simple solution for much of the social and industrial unrest in the country today and it would go a long way towards ameliorating the tide of emigration and unemployment which is creating havoc.

There is another matter of great concern and that is the rate of development and progress of the scheme initiated by Bord na Móna. The establishment of Bord na Móna was one of the most obvious things for the people of the undeveloped areas. It would be unfair to say they are not doing a good job and doing it well; but, since their efforts have only gone to prove how much could be done in that direction, is it not again another channel through which we could explore the possibilities of employing in those areas twice the number of people we are employing?

I do not think that Bord na Móna machine-won turf is sufficiently well appreciated by people who are crying out about the present cost of coal and other fuels. The Bord na Móna product is a first-class fuel which compares favourably with anything that could ever be imported. I would hope to see nothing used for domestic purposes other than the Bord na Móna machine-won peat. It is second to none but it is not sufficiently exploited. I should like to see it being used in every public institution. The mona-jet heating system has proved to be both economical and successful in any place where it is used. In fact, it has been installed in institutions for the sole purpose of reducing costs. The fact is that it is more economical, more beneficial and a cleaner type of heating. I think that, when the people of Dublin City are worrying about the price of coal, energy should be directed towards the use of Bord na Móna fuels in the form of briquettes or machine peat, or by the installation of central heating with the mona-jet, which is one of the greatest successes Bord na Móna has brought out since its establishment.

There are people going around selling the other article who will naturally spare no effort to belittle the native product. It is only natural to expect that they will try to sell oil-burning plant and coal-burning plant as against anything produced locally or a native product. One would think that, if the Bord na Móna article can be shown to be as good as any other, then at least it would be sufficient to warrant its more popular and general use, but the fact is that it is not merely as good but much better and much superior in every way, and it is to be deplored that there are some institutions which have adopted systems of heating other than a system using native fuel.

In speaking on this question of Bord na Móna, I was interested in the Minister's reference, in his opening statement, to the peat fuel generating station at Gweedore which he said he hoped would be in production early in 1957. We are all particularly delighted to know that it is likely to be in production so soon, but I should like to ask the Minister what arrangements have been made for the provision of hand-won turf to supply that generating station when it goes into production early in 1957. I understand the station is designed for the consumption of hand-won turf which will provide a remunerative market for the private turf producers of Donegal. If the need is to be met by hand-won turf, those private turf producers will require to know now what the price will be, what the arrangements for collection will be, where the turf will be collected, the amount required and the areas from which it will be drawn.

Literally thousands of tons per year will be needed. I think the figure was put at 100,000 tons per year. I am talking subject to correction, but there is not the slightest likelihood of even a fraction of that amount being available, if the plant goes into production early in 1957. The people would expect to be told what the price of turf was likely to be and what quantity would be required. I suggest that somebody approach the private turf producers and tell them what quantity may be taken from them, what price they are likely to get, whether the turf will be collected at the bogs or from central collecting points, or what the decision is going to be.

If the station consumes the amount anticipated at the start, I can say that it would be in a position to take all the hand-won turf the entire private turf producers of Donegal would be likely to produce. By that means, we would be enabled to give employment to people who have to leave these areas and go abroad. It would be an important step towards creating more employment in areas like Donegal. For that reason, I would be anxious that the Minister should make some statement with regard to the plans for the provision of hand-won turf for that scheme.

It is the job of the E.S.B. to arrange where they will get the supply of turf and what price they will pay for it. That is a matter of administration between the board and the producers. I have no function in that matter at all.

I fully appreciate that it is the primary function of the E.S.B. to make those arrangements. Surely, however, the Minister would be sufficiently interested in the unemployment problem to interfere to the extent that the people of the area concerned will get due notice of the quantity which is likely to be availed of, the amount they may produce and the price they are likely to get for it? So far as I am aware, they have been given no intimation up to the present as to what they are likely to get for the turf which should be produced now if the plant is to go into production in 1957.

Would the Deputy suggest that the turf producers should organise themselves in some kind of organisation and negotiate with the E.S.B. in regard to the quantity and price?

That is a suggestion.

It is not new to the Deputy, surely?

I do not think they have got any lead whatever in regard to the production of hand-won turf for this station. The rumour prevalent in Donegal is that the station will not now use hand-won turf but that it will use machine-won turf from the Tullyard bog at Glenties. Until the air is clarified in regard to that matter, there is not likely to be any concerted effort by the turf producers in the county. If the E.S.B. want even a fraction of the supply of hand-won turf that will be necessary one would surely expect them to give some notice either by advertisement or otherwise to private producers so that they could get together to produce the required amount. If the station consumes the amount of turf it was originally envisaged it would consume, it will take all the available hand-won turf produced in any year in County Donegal. That would be a very great asset to an area crying out for employment.

The question of G.N.R. transport is, so to speak, sub judice at the moment. Has anything been done to bring about some improvement or some definite arrangement in regard to the serious problem foisted unexpectedly upon us? It is a difficult and special problem and, for these reasons, we would expect it to get special attention. If the worst happens as a result of the present G.N.R. crisis, we could be left in a more serious position than any other county served by the G.N.R. The Minister assured us on several occasions that the matter was being surveyed and studied but, as yet, we have had no indication as to what our transport in the county in the future is likely to be. It is a matter of urgency in the light of what may happen one way or another. It is important that there should be some solution and that a blueprint should be ready and plans made for what, to us, could be an emergency if the worst happens as a result of the present crisis. I appeal to the Minister to expedite a decision on the transport problem in Donegal.

I would urge the Minister to give some little attention to industries in County Donegal which are not going as well as they might go at the moment. As a result of a parliamentary question, the Minister recently gave me information regarding the knitwear industry in Donegal. I thought that his approach to the question at the time was such that he considered that my question was designed for political purposes. There was no such motive. Every Donegal Deputy has, I hope, a genuine interest in the industries we have there and particularly in the knitwear industry, which is a traditional industry in our county and which has its roots far back in the years there. I am afraid the prospects are by no means as bright as the Minister was inclined to lead me to believe on that occasion. It is one thing to get certain information from the people concerned and it is another thing to have intimate association with the problem in the area affected by it.

I can assure the Minister that all is not well in regard to these industries in County Donegal at the moment. I will go no further than to say that I hope some serious attention will be paid to the potential dangers which lie around the corner, particularly in regard to the knitwear industry in Donegal. We have too few industries of any kind and we can ill afford to see even one man laid off work. We must view with alarm the likelihood of a crisis arising in the industries which we have. I hope we can trust the Minister to use his good offices to ensure that that will not happen.

We are not satisfied that industrial expansion is as rapid as it might be, now that everybody in this House is agreed on the general pattern of the development of Irish industry. We are all agreed that protection is necessary for home industry and we have accepted that the Irish industrialists are capable of producing as good an article as the foreigner. Since we are agreed on these points, I think we can expect a more accelerated programme of industrial development and particularly a decentralisation of industry.

The Undeveloped Areas Act is due to expire in 1958. The Minister was able to show a satisfactory picture. Already, half the allocated fund of £2,000,000 has been expended. That Act has served to show where we can do more and what it is necessary to do if we are to solve completely the question of decentralisation so that, as many as possible of the industries which we are likely to have in this country in the future, as well, perhaps, as some of those which already exist in centralised areas, will be set up in other parts of the country. We think that it would be better for all concerned if some existing industries and potential industries could be diverted to the undeveloped areas.

The Minister referred to what he hopes to achieve from his recent visits abroad. He made no definite statement as regard what was likely to happen other than that the prospects were very bright and that the number of inquiries seems to have justified the mission he undertook. He did not give any encouragement to people on the western seaboard when he said that, if those foreigners come here at all, he could not compel them to go to any particular area even in cases where manufacturing licences may be necessary. If foreigners are to be brought here on the invitation of the Government to produce goods for us we should at least make one condition, and the gravity of the problem facing us certainly justifies it. We should make the proviso that they will not be given accommodation in centralised areas where industry already exists. They should be compelled to go to the western seaboard and set up their industries there. With the inducements which they have been given, together with the various concessions outlined in recent legislation, I think that would not be asking too much of them. Furthermore, if some industrialists already operating in the country would be prepared to consider a decentralisation of their industry, we should like it, too.

The population on the western seaboard is diminishing to such an extent that the number of representatives in this House from those areas will eventually be curtailed while the major portion of the representation here will come from the overcrowded cities. An unhealthy and lopsided economy will develop if this problem is not tackled seriously before it goes too far. It may result in a type of economy which will tend towards fewer and fewer people being able to find even a meagre existence in the country.

This Estimate covers a very wide and varied field of activity. I think it can fairly be said that, in that very composite range of effort, the Minister has shown an assiduity and devotion to his office that, in many facets of the Department's activity, has shown a very welcome forward impetus. His Department has to do with some of the perennial headaches that afflict this House.

In my limited contribution, I want to try and direct the Minister's attention to problems significant in the constituency I represent. I will start with An Bord Fáilte. I happened to have a few leisure hours recently and, on attending a cinema here in Dublin, I saw a most interesting short film, with a commentary by a well-known Irish commentator, giving a most fetching account of the highlands of Scotland. As the Minister is aware, I have been harping for years in this House on the necessity for An Bord Fáilte to get out these very effective and properly-edited films of areas of Ireland. If people in other countries could get the same view in relation to Ireland as we get in relation to other countries through the medium of these short films I feel sure it would prove an effective stimulus to tourism in this country. In our tourist development, I think we are inclined to concentrate on larger centres, thus building up something that is artificial in Irish life in preference to boosting and letting the world know of the Ireland that is and of the Ireland that can be viewed in its natural, abundant, happy state.

I said before in this House that I think the time has come for us to have a short colour film made of the abundant beauties of West Cork to stimulate tourist interest in that area which would have beneficial results for the population. We have a people who are instinctively hospitable in a traditional, warm-hearted Irish way, around such beauty spots as Glandore, Lough Ine, the whole of Roaringwater Bay, and Dunmanus Bay, right into Bantry Bay. We have the famous Healy Pass, the beautiful, wooded areas of Glengarriff and the multitudinous inlets all around that coast with their natural, simple attractions, which, if properly displayed, would indeed become a very useful adjunct to the economy of the district.

I am sick and tired of an effort to make Ireland something it is not for the tourist. It would be far better for us to allow the tourists to see Ireland as it is and to let them luxuriate in what I might describe as the ever-changing beauty of the Irish countryside and the ever-warm hospitality of the Irish people. I think that that type of propaganda and that type of effort should be a concern of An Bord Fáilte rather than the many brochures we see limited to specific areas. Along the south-west and western seaboards of this country we have many happy holiday grounds for all types of tourists, whether they are people seeking the quietude of a seaside bungalow with safe sands for their families, whether they are anglers seeking somewhere to fish or whether they are the holidaymakers of the travelling caravan type who want to tour the scenic beauties of our island.

I feel that the time has come when An Bord Fáilte might well expend some of the money allocated to them to send forth from this country the type of short film which we are seeing so frequently in the cinemas in this country at the moment in relation to the Scandinavian countries and to the shires of England and Scotland, and in relation to many of the continental holiday resorts, the watering places, and the mountains and lakes of Switzerland. The very fact that we have such a range of these short films coming into this country is a significant indication that these countries regard these films as a worth-while method of attracting tourists.

Deputy Brennan dealt with the Undeveloped Areas Act and the fact that perhaps it has not been the success that might have been hoped for in those areas. He pleaded with the Minister, properly I feel sure, in relation to the survival of certain industries that exist in Donegal. I find that, with the possible exception of a recently developed industry in Ballingeary under Gaeltacht Services, we have not any industry in West Cork. It is true the Minister can properly claim that a very large mining concern is now interested in exploration of Roaringwater Bay and Berehaven. In common with the Minister and all wellwishers of that particular facet, I hope that these explorations will be successful and that they will lead to a revival of the one-time intense mining operation in the Allihies area of Berehaven.

However, that in itself, though a very welcome and significant development from our point of view, does not offset the fact that there is in the area which I represent no industry of any size at all. The Minister may well say to me that it is up to the local people to put up proposals, but in the light of the recent census returns, I think the problem of putting something into West Cork has become more urgent. There is no other place in the country in which there has been a more significant decrease in population than in West Cork, particularly, in the islands and peninsulas of my constituency.

There are many very strong factors operating against the possibility of private enterprise moving in to industrialise such areas. I feel the Minister could explore the possibility of some of the State-sponsored companies developing some adjunct to our general schemes in certain areas. We have no Bord na Móna development there. In the past we have had a tremendous impetus in relation to rural electrification but there are certain areas and isolated pockets still left which rural electrification has not reached.

The difficulties that arise there have already been pointed out by Deputy Brennan whose constituency may in many ways be similar to mine. He pointed out that the impact of certain new charges has slowed up the anxiety of people to take in current and that, inevitably, unless there is some readjustment in the approach of the E.S.B. in these Gaeltacht areas, it is unlikely this benefit, so long sought by the people, will be obtained by many of them.

There are other factors operating very heavily against the possibility of industrialisation in West Cork. One of the main ones is isolation and the extraordinary impact the transport of goods, first of all in the raw material stage and secondly as the finished article, has on that type of a development. That leaves the problem of the people down there very serious. There is the danger that unless there is some specific effort made by the Government to bring industries to such places, any hope of arresting the all too apparent haemorrhage of emigration will be fruitless.

It is true the Minister can say that the present position does not allow him to do this or to do that, but I would urge on the Minister and on the Government, in the light of what has happened, in the significant light of the last census report, that the problem will have to be reviewed on the basis of how something effective could be put into this area to create some industrial development therein. I know a similar claim can be advanced for all types and kinds of areas in the country. I know that in one facet of industrial development in recent years we have been fortunate in West Cork; there has been a substantial revival of the fishing industry. Bord Iascaigh Mhara are making a significant contribution, by way of ice-making, to the proper development of this industry. I wonder if the Minister, in his noble capacity as general entrepreneur in all national planning in the industrial field, might not find it possible to ask the Industrial Development Authority to investigate the possibility of bringing to West Cork, as an adjunct to the development of the fishing scheme, some kind of a fish-canning or a shell-fish processing industry.

The thing that is rather distressing to people representing these areas is that there seems to be no co-ordination between the Departments that would enable the development in one field to be dovetailed into development in another field. There is no doubt there must be a great potential in the development of an adjunct to the fishing industry. I know that problems of this kind take time and long investigation but it is rather distressing to a Deputy representing a constituency like West Cork, which played such an extraordinarily significant part in the securing of the freedom of this country, to find that it has become, in 30 years, one of the really neglected areas in the State industrially. The matter is the more regrettable because at one time not only was there a tremendous mining industry in the area of West Cork but, as well, one of the greatest salted mackerel and herring export trades in the country. Now, in spite of the fact that our hills and valleys resounded to the echo of the fight for liberty to such an extent that one may rightly claim that that particular part carried more than its share of the struggle, people down there feel a certain amount of desolation when no significant effort is made by the Government as such to establish some kind of an industry in the area. It is easy to appreciate cold-blooded logical arguments when one is dealing with cold facts, but it is very difficult to convince people generally that, if the Government had enthusiasm and the necessary sympathy, they could not do something significant for the area.

The Undeveloped Areas Act held forth promise, but the multiple difficulties that are quickly apparent to the promoter of any industry in relation to many of the areas to which the Undeveloped Areas Act applies, have completely outweighed the advantage of a grant from An Foras Tionscal. Investigation and deliberation by An Foras Tionscal cannot be described as speedy. It may well be that there is a tremendous need for caution and research in connection with certain projects, but in many cases the time lag between investigation and ultimate decision has made promoters grow cold and has caused interest to disappear. As I said when the Bill was going through the House, although the measure did not give any hope of wealth for those areas, it held out some prospect of development. That development, as far as my area is concerned, has been nil, and I feel the time has come when some kind of a review of certain areas must be made by the Minister's advisers to see can something worth while be done, particularly in an area such as the one I represent, where the recent census of population shows such a distressing picture of emigration.

The problem goes even deeper than mere emigration from the area because we are all coming up against the problem of people who have employment in rural areas but who will not stay there. We are coming up against the problem of the evacuation of the small holdings and the problem of people who, for some reason—perhaps encouragement by relatives who have left before them for America or England—are being drawn out of, if not very much ameliorated living conditions in their own area, at least fairly reasonable conditions. They have gone to seek the more hectic or the more varied life that can be offered to them, either in America or in the industrial centres of England. There must be some happy medium; there must be some way of putting even initially uneconomic industry into these areas to make a valuable contribution ultimately to the local economy.

That inevitably brings us round to the problem created by transport, and transport inevitably brings up that ghoulish shadow, the losses C.I.E. are incurring. It is very hard to argue, when you find a good deal of inefficiency and lack of transport in these isolated areas, that C.I.E. should be allowed to continue there at all. The Minister is well aware of the case that is being made repeatedly by fishermen in relation to the transport of their fish to market. Even though, to some extent, the problems of the Berehaven and Schull fishermen were met by certain extensions that were given to local hauliers in Bantry, the problem is not by any means solved. With the greatly increased landings of fish in these areas, the time has come for the Minister to exclude the transport of this highly perishable commodity from the rigidity of the transport code for merchandise.

I wonder sometimes if, in relation to the problems of C.I.E. and the problems of distribution in this country, the Minister's Department has ever explored the possibility of the use of our canals and of oil barges on them for the distribution of oil and petrol in the internal towns of the State, and whether any consideration was given or investigation made in respect of the possibility of using our small harbours for the distribution to those towns of fuel by light coastal tanker. If such a development were feasible, it might boost one side of the central transport authority into a paying venture.

I realise that very large vested interests such as the oil companies might be affected and that difficulties might arise in respect of that kind of changeover, but it does seem a pity that with canals used as they are in certain of the Lowland countries for this type of transport, involving a substantial saving in wear and tear on roads, some effort would not be made to stop the growth of moss and rush along our canals.

As I said in opening, this is a wide and comprehensive Department. The Minister deals with the myriad of problems relating to all facets of industry. I feel that the time has come for the Minister to indicate what if any changes are contemplated in the Control of Manufactures Act. With the tremendous drive made by the Minister to attract American capital into the State and the drive he made prior to that to encourage certain continental interests to invest in this country, I feel that the time has come for a review of that Act. If we are anxious to get certain types of foreign investment, foreign industrial techniques and technical advice and aid in certain industrial developments in this country, I feel we are not going to have that development, unless the people so investing in industry can feel that they will have substantial control and effective powers in the organisation and building up of that industry.

I feel that the Minister deserves very special commendation for the manner in which he has dealt with problems that have arisen during the year, particularly in relation to labour disputes or potential labour difficulties. The country is fortunate that his broad and long connection with trade unionism and his appreciation of industrial relationships and the responsibilities of employer and employee have kept the country free from any major strike.

It is a good thing to see industrial employment at its present very high level, but the Minister and the House are aware that the testing time is coming for Irish industry. With limited home markets for products, the inevitable competition of the export market must be faced, if any of our industries are to be a worthwhile part of our economy. There is no doubt that there is room for significant help to industry in that field. I know that the recent report of the commission set up to investigate industrial taxation requires a lot of careful study and analysis, but if any of our keenest industries are to become successful in the export market, certain concessions will have to be made to them. Whether those concessions are going to be in the form of a tax remission or an export subsidy, or whatever particular form they may ultimately take, it is necessary to accelerate the analysis and investigation of this whole matter in order to put the plan of export encouragement into effect as quickly as possible.

I do not believe that we yet have a keen enough sense of market research in this country. If many of our industries carried out market research, they might be able to find outlets for their surpluses. While the Department of Industry and Commerce, through its various agencies such as Coras Tráchtála, has been able to carry out certain preliminary investigations and provide valuable information, the Minister should emphasise to some of our industries the need for constant market research. With the notable swings in taste and the diversity and variety of goods now available, it should be possible, particularly when dealing with the American market, to explore outlets which would be very fruitful for some of our more patently Irish products. If proper market research and investigation were made it would be possible for Irish industry to provide a range and variety of goods that would make for the success of the Minister's Irish Day buying plan in America, which would give a worth-while return to Irish industries.

There are markets for Irish handmade lace, for goods carrying Celtic motifs and for predominantly Irish products, whether from Gaeltacht factories, from the linen industry or even from cottage industries. There is a lack of adequate research at present which allows these efforts to peter out. The industrialist in this country must be made realise that he will have to find some kind of economic outlet for his surplus, or his industry will inevitably decay, because, with the development of production research, improved production methods and the possible advance of automation, more and more surpluses will have to be disposed of in the competitive world markets. I feel that, to gear ourselves for that market, there must be advances in market research by the industrialists themselves and an effective concessionary approach by the Government towards exports.

I have always been interested in the question of exploiting more fully the domestic market for turf. We have very little control over the price that we have to pay for coal. In view of the steeply rising cost of coal, a little bit of propaganda about the quality of Bord na Móna hand-won turf and briquettes might result in a substantial extension of the domestic market. I know that there is a residuum of suspicion about turf in the big centres of population, as a result of the people's experience of wet turf and even wetter timber of the emergency period. Having regard to the technical capacity of Bord na Móna to produce turf of the quality of its machine-won turf and briquettes it should be possible to stimulate the demand for its products on the domestic market. Apart from being a worth-while contribution to employment within the State, the increased use of turf could make a fairly significant contribution to remedying the adverse trade balance. Undoubtedly, good quality turf, properly won, whether machine-won or hand-won, is comparable with coal and in many ways superior to it. Certainly a turf fire is more traditionally Irish than a coal fire.

This field of development is helped by the steep rise in the cost of coal and the time has come for a very serious drive to propagandise turf as a fuel. The development can be pressed forward rapidly if the Minister will use his position as Minister for Industry and Commerce to impress upon his colleagues, who may have responsibility in connection with many institutions, that he would welcome, as being of assistance to him in his particular Department, more enthusiastic efforts on their part to have turf used in these institutions.

I know that the Minister cannot tackle all these problems and that he must be reasonably indulgent with Deputies from various areas who are primarily concerned with the problem in their constituencies. If there is to be a significant effort made to arrest emigration, it can only be done by providing some alternative for the people. If the market for hand-won turf can be extended and domestic use of it stimulated, that is a ready way of providing employment in many of the undeveloped areas in the western and south-western seaboard and in the areas such as that which I represent.

In regard to areas such as West Cork the Government must realise that private enterprise has failed in these areas, that, in spite of inducements, there has been no apparent success. In order to be effective, industry in these areas must be of a State-sponsored or semi-State sponsored type and, in the initial stages, losses in operation will have to be borne by the Exchequer to enable the industry to get on its feet.

Similar claims can be made by many of my colleagues for their respective areas but I make no apology for making a claim for the area that I represent for the reason, as I have said before, that the population is declining. It is an undeniable fact that the greatest irreparable loss to this country is represented by the flight from the land of the boy or girl in the 18 to 21 age group. The State has nurtured these boys and girls, through its educational and adjunct facilities, to the stage at which they could become of benefit to the nation. The cost involved in that is being lost and can never be recovered. While we talk here and do nothing, more people are emigrating. There was a time when this little nation could support a much greater population. Unless some effective measures are taken in the areas such as that which I represent, we shall be faced with a problem of virtually evacuated areas, with very few homesteads, with only the very old or the extremely young there at all.

I know that the Minister has been more than sympathetic to me and to my colleague when we have approached him with our problems. I know that, like myself, he is most anxious for the success of the mining venture in that area. The problem is becoming so grave, particularly in the more isolated areas of the Gaeltacht and Breac-Ghaeltacht, that I must make an appeal to the Minister to have the possibility of development by some State-sponsored body explored and investigated as quickly as possible because, unless some significant effort is made in that area, as an earnest of the Government's intention to do something for the people there, they will continue to feel neglected. They have felt that neglect in the past, a neglect which is very often referred to by the Bishop of Cork and Ross, the Most Reverend Dr. Lucey.

It is pathetic to see the denudation of population in places like Cape Clear and Sherkin, in Hare Island and Long Island, in the various peninsulas, whether it be Beara, Kilcrohane, Durrus, or Goleen, and right back to Crookhaven and the Mizzen but that is the picture. That is the unhappy reality and the people there inevitably ask us, who represent them, the question: "What will you do about it?" Now I do not know what can be done about it but I am asking the Minister to explore every possible avenue of potential development in that area which may have the result of leading to a significant improvement in the employment position there. The Minister can assist us by bringing the attention of An Bord Fáilte to what can be done there through the medium of suitable propaganda dealing with the multiple far-famed beauty spots in that area.

I shall not labour this cause any longer. The Minister has proved that he has both the capacity and the ability to deal with the situation, that capacity and capability which have made him such a significant success in his Department. The earnest I ask of him in the fulfilment of that success is that we, in West Cork, will be given the benefit of some kind of industrial development. I ask him to urge upon the E.S.B. the immediate reinvestigation of the few remaining areas there that need rural electrification, particularly the reinvestigation of the charges they propose in relation to houses which, through circumstances entirely outside the control of the owners of those houses, happen to lie slightly outside the development areas proper.

These are grave problems in an area like West Cork. In a cold analysis on paper, they mean nothing. To the individual whose house may lie at the foot of the hill, or half-way up that hill, and a few hundred yards outside the development area the situation is fraught with gravity. The impact of the cost of installation deters him from benefiting by something which should inure to himself and his family. He is deterred from taking advantage of a social amenity which would render his home infinitely more habitable than it is under present circumstances.

We, in West Cork, have not got anything in the industrial line over all the long years of native Government. We are looking forward now to the possibility that, with the success of mining in the Berehaven Peninsula, the Minister may be able to use his good offices to develop a smelting industry in that area, and give us an earnest of some industrial development, a development we have awaited for many years and which, I hope, we have not awaited in vain.

In connection with this Estimate, charges have been made against Deputies on this side of the House that we are inclined to moan. In view of the recent figures for emigration over the last five years, unless we can draw the attention of the public to the problem of preventing that emigration, unless there is a far greater volume of discussion on the whole problem, unless we re-examine the whole economic policy of the State, part of which we have been responsible for and part of which is the result of marginal changes and other forms of policy by the present Government—unless we do all these things, there is no possibility of our preventing the continually increasing flow of people from our shores.

The fact is, people are now leaving the country without even waiting to find out whether there will be a better life for them; they are leaving the country in spite of the massive scheme of development services implemented by the Government—and schemes have grown so large in cost that the Government in recent years has been taking more than the entire savings of the people for its own capital enterprises. Emigration has reached such a stage that we now have a larger number of dependents per 1,000 persons occupied; we have a larger number of people under 14 and over 65 than any country in Europe. We must realise that, despite the many schemes that have been put into operation from time to time, whatever else they may have done, they have not been able to arrest the post-war flow of emigration.

The present Government now has an opportunity which was denied to other Governments, now that these figures have been published, of thinking in a more radical way as to what is required for the future, of possibly being able to effect changes, which, because of a certain complacency amongst us all, it was not possible to carry out hitherto. Ever since the Government took office in 1954, when inflationary conditions began, it has had an opportunity of reviewing the whole economic policy of the State. So far as one can judge from the weak and tepid utterances we have heard, the Government has not the slightest intention of either considering any radical measures or making any drastic effort to cure the position.

We have now reached the position where our habit of importation has become grossly excessive. Many of our industries, if the import content of workers' wages and salaries are included, are not doing sufficient to reduce our import commitment. Many of our industries will have to turn over to exports if they are to help in finding a solution to the problem of providing employment and, at the same time, correcting the balance of payments position.

I do not think the Government is aware of the fact that, although there has been a noticeable and most commendable increase in industrial exports since the war, these exports have taken place, in certain industries at least, in a scarcity market. Should the boom level off in America and Great Britain, we shall be in further difficulties in relation to our industrial exports, just as we are facing difficulties at present in relation to our agricultural exports, unless we can provide a taxation system and offer incentives to our industrialists which will enable them to face greater competition.

We have had no indication from the Minister that these matters have been considered. We recall now, with somewhat ironic amusement, Deputy Costello's statement reported in the Mayo News of 21st June, 1952, when he said that they, in Fine Gael, had within their ranks young economists and people who were trained in finance and they were taking advantage of their advice in bringing new ideas to solve the present difficulties and problems. The only new economist we know of in Fine Gael is merely confusing the position, going around and contradicting statements made by the Minister for Finance with regard to the gravity of the present position and talking as though that position did not exist at all.

In the face of our present economic circumstances, the statements of policy made with regard to industrial development and the financing of greater production look somewhat ludicrous. We have the Minister for Social Welfare reported in the Enniscorthy Echo of 1st May, 1954, speaking on our economic position, as saying:—

"The difficulty seems to be that the money was not available. The Labour Party prefers to be realistic about that. We believe that the money should be made available and made available by the Government in control. We believe that the Government should have the power to create and control credit."

The only result we have so far seen of that policy is that our external reserves are disappearing and we are living more and more in a world of importing more and more, instead of producing more and more since the Government took office. As a result, it would be frightful to think that this Government should gain control of the national credit. The only result would be that we would import still more and produce still less.

We had the Taoiseach reported in the Irish Independent of the 10th May, 1954, as saying:—

"Fine Gael plans to change the position under which the Government scoops the pool of national savings by charging still higher rates of interest on loans, higher rates of interest which raise the price of money and make it shorter for everybody else. That will end."

The Government have raised the rate of interest and have scooped the entire pool of national savings, and more, for Government purposes. We have not seen any large scale effort on their part to provide money for directly productive purposes. We have recently had an analysis made of the extent to which the Government did scoop the pool of national savings and we have seen that the position is that private enterprise has recently been denied the freedom of capital movement which it deserves and which it needs for its operation.

We have had the grandiose statement made by the Minister for Industry and Commerce, who said, in speaking at Kildare, as reported in the Irish Independent of 5th May:

"The Labour Party's participation in an inter-Party Government would be conditional on broad general agreement being reached on a radical programme to deal with the difficulties confronting the nation. The Labour Party would not, and did not mould its policy to suit others."

We have heard no radical programme put forward in the course of the Estimate and we have heard no speculation on plans to encourage private enterprise to further national exports. Whatever radical plans there may have been have been lost in the sea of mounting imports and the balance of payments difficulties.

In the study recently made, which can be regarded as an authentic analysis, we are told that gross production in this country increased by 7.6 per cent. from 1949 to 1954. The average increase in European countries which report to O.E.E.C. was 29.3 per cent. Industry has provided a considerable proportion of that total. Industry in this country provided 28 per cent. of the total as compared with 40 per cent. in O.E.E.C. countries. That figure deals with the period from 1949 to 1954 and it also relates to countries which remained neutral and were unharmed in the war. If we are to provide new jobs for 15,000 people every year, in the undeveloped condition of our country, our production increase should have exceeded the O.E.E.C. average. We only commenced industrial production in 1932 and we should have had a more satisfactory result and a greater increase than most European countries whose industrial production was much older than ours.

We have also been informed that there is something entirely wrong in this country about the general system under which part of the results of production are put aside for further capital development. We have been told that, for the period 1949 to 1954, the amount of capital investment was equivalent to only 10 per cent. of our total production. In O.E.E.C. countries, the amount was 15 per cent. We are told that, in a country which really desires to develop itself, that figure is totally inadequate. In any really intensive development, the figure should be nearly three times that. If we are to attempt to catch up, we should have a programme to encourage a far greater investment of capital to assist increased production.

When we come to an examination of the proportion of the total fixed capital of the country invested in industry, we find that the total fixed capital so invested was about 50 per cent. in European countries in 1954 and 13.5 per cent. in this country. We find that, so far as State capital is concerned, in 1954, the total amount spent in State capital investment was .21 per cent. and for power it was 7 per cent., those being the principal increases of production associated with industry.

As I have said, I think the Government should treat this whole question more radically and should not hesitate to question the whole system under which we have lived since the war. They have the opportunity to do so, now that this problem of emigration has come before us. There has been a feeling, since the war, which is quite evident from looking at the State accounts and State policy in general, that a very large development of State services of all kinds would seem to be the best basis for keeping people in the country and preventing emigration. That, apparently, is not true. People have emigrated in enormous numbers and we have got to consider now whether some fairly drastic amendment of that principle would not result in greater incentives to production. I am not suggesting that anything drastic should be done overnight. Drastic steps taken overnight might lead to disaster, but there has to be some shift in the emphasis paid by the Government towards increased production in this country.

If we take the whole question of taxation, I think the Government have shown complacency in their attitude towards taxation and the statement of the Minister for Finance must have been heard with great disappointment by the Minister for Industry and Commerce. The present system of taxation does not give to people capable of initiating industry in this country the kind of encouragement they need. We have to ask ourselves whether the present system of taxation is right, if we wish to expand our industries and expand our industrial exports.

It is no good simply taking the attitude that we cannot change the system now, that it is there and must be kept as it is, or that it is dangerous to change a system, or that, if we want to alter the impact of taxation from one group of people to another, it would be politically impossible. It is quite obvious that there must be a radical approach to this problem, based on the fact that of the people who are capable of starting industries, in spite of the progress that has been made, not enough of them have either confidence in the future of the country or are prepared to work within the present system of allowances for wear and tear or the present system of taxation in all its various forms. We have got to consider all those things.

Again, in connection with the expansion of industrial exports, I think the observation made in this study, entitled "Capital Formation, Saving and Economic Progress", by T.K. Whittaker—a very valuable paper which everybody should read; nobody need agree with all its conclusions but nevertheless it provides a great deal of stimulus—enables us to ask the question whether the system of protection by itself, together with grants from An Foras Tionscal for the undeveloped areas, is right or sufficient in the year 1956; whether offering protection and the assistance of An Foras Tionscal is sufficient in itself, and whether it may not be necessary to extend the principle of the grants given for the western areas to grants given in other areas. We have to consider whether that may not be a better way to attract capital.

We have also to consider that, as a result of inflation, new capital has become scarce. There is a tremendous capital squeeze on in Great Britain where they are even trying to restrain productive investment. There is a tightness of credit here due to our balance of payments position. The Minister for Industry and Commerce should consider the whole question of the easy availability of capital. Not everybody wants to get all their capital from the State; they want to get part of their resources from themselves. We have to consider all these matters.

As I have said, the application of the principle of grants for building and for plant may have to be extended beyond its present confines if we are to get the kind of encouragement we need for new industries and for industrial exports. The same thing applies to the whole principle of the control of prices. We have had the Coalition Government deluding the people for years and years that the Government can largely control prices. We have had a colossal waste of time in this House and outside it, debating the question of whether Governments under certain circumstances are responsible for increases in prices and to what extent they are responsible. We have a completely antiquated set of price control legislation that bears no relation to present conditions.

We have to ask ourselves has the present price control system prevented emigration? Is there any evidence that election upon election, wasted on this futile controversy, has encouraged people to stay in this country? We have had no clear impression from the Minister for Industry and Commerce as to how he regards this matter. Price control should be effected by competition in the ordinary way in peace time in respect of a great number of industries unless there is evidence of a very considerable volume of restrictive practices by the distributors and by the manufacturers concerned. Yet the Minister, in reply to a Parliamentary Question, gave me an extensive list of competitive industries in which the profits are still controlled by Government Order.

I think all that needs to be reexamined. Control of profits does not seem to have stopped prices rising. The profits in many of these industries, as a proportion of the total cost of the article, are almost negligible, amounting in many cases to anything from 3d. in the £ to 6d. in the £. That means a great deal to the people engaged in the industry. If the Minister was to make a list of the companies in this country and in Great Britain who paid the highest dividends and the largest bonuses and have offered the greatest number of scrip bonuses in the last 20 years, he would probably find that, in most cases, the products produced were the best of their kind and were sold at a price which was so low that it practically dictated the price level for all commodities in the same range.

The Minister should know that. He should know that, to come before this House in this acute position of our industrial development, to report this whole long list of profits, where manufacturing profits were still under control, there has not been "sufficient dynamic thinking"—what the Minister for Industry and Commerce said he was going to do when he was parading before the electorate in Kildare. I am not saying you can change all those matters 100 per cent. I am not saying the Minister should here and now remove every single element of price control from manufacturing industries. What I am saying is that we need a different approach—a modern approach. The present system has not prevented prices rising but it does discourage personal initiative. This is a country where private enterprise plays a major part in our economy, in so far as industry is concerned, and where it should play a far greater part. As I have said, we have no radical approach to these questions.

Take again the whole question of the abatement of tariffs at their present level. If the Minister thinks that any large scale investigation of tariffs, particularly those which have been given for prolonged periods, may have a discouraging effect on new promoters of industry, he might at least pay the same attention to the whole problem of productivity in industry that he pays to price control. We have many officers, we have a tremendous amount of discussion, we have publication in the papers week after week of the sittings of the Prices Advisory Council—all engaged in the negative factors involved in keeping prices down. How much discussion did we ever have in this House or by the present Minister and his colleagues on productivity or on the development of productivity or of some system by which the Government could encourage groups of manufacturers to reduce their prices by co-operative means, working together?

How often do we hear from the Minister proposals for employers and workers in the same industry to get together with a view to increasing productivity? Why is it that, ten years after the war, a considerable number of trade union leaders have still a Luddite attitude towards increasing production? They fear that if they increase production or output per worker, the result will be disemployment, whereas as everybody knows the whole of the production of the world is on the principle that, if you reduce the price of an article, the public have more to buy something else or to buy more of the article produced. That is the only way by which industry has progressed and by which a greater volume of employment has been constantly given in every country in the world. While there may be a temporary adverse reaction, if a proper system of technological training is working, a system by which people could be retrained in other industries, if there is really galvanic life and energy in industrial development and an increase in production per worker, you only aid the community and in the long run bring greater income to the workers concerned.

We are now nine years after the war and we have not one tenth of the money being spent, propaganda carried out, organisations created and discussions between workers and employers as exists, for example, in Great Britain. Unfortunately, from the point of view of the average man in the State, the papers report in the ordinary way only the strikes that take place in Great Britain. They report all that is worst in the Labour situation there. It is an unfortunate thing, but if we read the papers every day in connection with both Great Britain and America we tend to read of all that is worst in industrial relations.

The Government have made no effort to publish the growing tendency of employers or workers to take part in joint productivity courses of study and examination run by entire industries in which the workers gain incentive bonuses as a result of increasing production and in which industrial consultants, experts, are invited in some cases by the unions to work in certain industries. There are groups of industries in Great Britain and America where every two or three units in that industry take on the services of an industrial consultant and, as a result, productivity increases, and, as a further result, incentive bonus schemes are promoted from which the workers derive higher wages. The unions in some cases would go to other units in that industrial group and say: "We think we should have the same kind of industrial consultant study taking place as is taking place in these units because our workers benefit and because production in the industry will increase and there will be greater opportunities for employment and promotion in the ranks of the workers."

We have the Institute of Management and we have no leadership from the Government in regard to that problem. The Institute of Management is doing excellent work and there is quite a number of industries here which are making use of industrial consultants. There are still numbers of people who think of the industrial consultant as he used to be 20 years ago—a person with a purely hardboiled, mechanical mind, trying to make the workers slave harder and harder. You can actually read references by workers to industrial consultants as though they were still of that type, whereas the whole pattern is changed now.

No industrial consultant can make any progress, unless he receives the consent of the union during the whole course of his examination. The Minister might feel that in certain cases examinations of tariffs were long overdue and that perhaps a system of protection might discourage the sort of industrialist who feels he would like to be in a freer market, but if he feels that an examination of tariffs is a matter which should be done very slowly, he has the alternative.

One of the problems which faces any industry in this country is that examination of productivity by outside experts is extremely costly. Industrial consultants are liable to charge £120 a week for their services. Again, in other countries, industries frequently appoint an industrial consultant collectively, and, as a result, the cost is reduced. I am speaking about this in a very vague and general way. I am partly relating what I am saying to the Bill which we put forward in 1946 in which we were going to consider all these matters, consider better relations between employers and workers in their own industry and also consider ways and means by which the Government, without using the big stick, could give encouragement to groups of industries to improve their methods of production and so cheapen costs and help in solving their problems.

It is nine years since the war and we still have emergency price control legislation and less talk about productivity in industry in this House than on almost any other topic. Yet it is an essential factor in improving industry and in encouraging industry here. Let us return to the general question of the availability of capital. We learned from this study that, between 1949 and 1954, about £8,000,000 was invested in industry. We were also told that of the £112,000,000, money invested as a result of the publication of corporate issues such as State loans and also industrial issues, only £8,000,000 was devoted to industrial production.

Again, that raises the whole question of the climate in which we live from the standpoint of investment and of what needs to be done to encourage investment. I am well aware that the Government cannot do everything. I agree entirely with Deputy Lemass, who has been responsible for the promotion of the vast majority of the industries in this country. Without a very great personal appeal to the people at this juncture, we shall get nowhere. We have got to make up our mind one way or the other, as the authors of the Ibec Report told us some years ago, whether this country is to be a country in which the State comes first in all its capital endeavours or private enterprise is to be encouraged.

The whole study of capital formation since the war and the problems of our savings spent by the State suggests that we have not solved the problem of emigration in that way. Everything suggests that we need a new approach towards encouraging ambition in the individual and encouraging people living in this country, in a climate of very large State expenditure which has eventually resulted in excessive imports. We have been living in an atmosphere in which the Government has provided, through State companies, new forms of production. We ought at least start considering whether we have not got to do more to stimulate the individual, because, unless people are willing to see what can be done to increase production in this country, because of the flow of emigration and the disappointment that it will occasion among those who would think of starting industries with a rising market, and a rising population, we should get into a slough of despond, unless some sort of shock treatment is applied.

I do not believe that the shock treatment can be applied any more by massive State expenditure on all kinds of varying projects all over the country in the hope that the people employed on these projects will stay here. We tried that. We are spending already enormous sums on that kind of development and one of the results has been an excessive import of goods which has now caused trouble to our balance of payments. We ought to engage in far more discussion in this House on how to encourage the individual and deal with all these means of taxation incentives to export, alternative methods of encouraging new industries to start and so forth.

We on this side of the House are disappointed by the complacency of the Government and the Taoiseach, and by the fact that, with the opportunities they now have, they have not yet told the country they are going to reconsider the whole of our economic position, with a view to ending the stagnancy of feeling and the position in which people are now emigrating at a younger and younger age, without waiting to see whether there cannot be some development which will give them reasonable employment.

I agree that the problem is a tremendous one. People are leaving in very large numbers for England, simply because they will get a slightly higher wage than they are now getting, showing that the feeling of many of the younger generation is that we have a form of economic handicap with Great Britain, that the labour market is so common there is no longer the same personal choice for any of them who would like to stay in this country and share in its development, even though perhaps the salaries and earnings might for a considerable number of years be lower than in Great Britain, or perhaps the amenities available to them in different districts might not be the same.

There is one other point on emigration which concerns people who are unable to secure for themselves the standard of living they think they are entitled to in this country, with our limited means, and to whom it is not possible to give jobs because of stagnancy in production. Deputy Lemass is entirely correct when he says industrial production is extremely important from the standpoint of giving employment. We cannot go ahead unless we revive agriculture. It is absolutely essential to revive agriculture, to increase our agricultural exports and reduce our agricultural imports.

As everybody who studies the agricultural economy knows, a tremendous increase in the production of agricultural commodities no longer, in this day and age, gives large employment of itself. It does create employment in the servicing of machinery and in the provision of machinery. It creates far greater employment in distribution and in industry in every single town round where the agricultural community lives. Of itself, it is not any longer a great direct provider of employment. Therefore, while we have an urgent need to increase agricultural production and to get back into our competitive market, we know that, at the same time, unless industry progresses and industries are started which will provide the farmer with the commodities he can buy more freely because he has more money in his pocket, we shall not have completed the job of giving employment as distinct from increasing production.

Deputies on the Government Benches try to confuse the public when speaking about agriculture. The facts are all there for everybody to see. Very little new employment can be given by a very great increase in agricultural production. It is around the agricultural area that the employment will arise out of the increased purchasing power of the farmer.

I shall conclude by reminding the Minister for Industry and Commerce of his promise at the time of the election that he would join the Government only if there were radical solutions for our basic problems. We have heard no debate or discussion or even a suggestion for discussion in this House of things we might do. For as long as I can remember, the former Minister for Industry and Commerce, Deputy Lemass, whenever he spoke on these questions always ranged beyond the immediate possibilities and the immediate Government policy. He was always willing to discuss ways and means by which the problem of emigration could be solved, at the same time pointing out that they were matters which would have to be carefully considered. The present stagnant attitude and sort of quiet generalisations about increasing production as a cure for emigration will not solve the problem. We need a more stimulating approach to these matters.

I should like to start where Deputy Childers finished, on the question of the necessity for an increase in agriculture and to point out that that increase will not give the employment which many people seem to think it will. Agricultural production can be increased tremendously but, because automation has already reached this country by virtue of the fact that most farms have been mechanised, we cannot hope to solve the unemployment problem, no matter how great the increase in the production of the agricultural industry may be. I am very glad that a realisation of that position has at last been reached because many speakers seemed to think that the only solution of our problems was increased agricultural production.

I believe the present Minister for Industry and Commerce must be commended on his tremendous efforts to solve the problems which face this country at the present time. While saying that, it is only fair to add that a similar effort was made by Deputy Lemass when he was Minister for Industry and Commerce. I hope the present Minister will not, like Deputy Lemass, get tired when he has a certain amount done and allow things just to slide along. I believe that if the effort had been kept up by Deputy Lemass we might possibly not be in the position in which we are at the present time. If the present Minister can keep up the pressure, and if new industries are established, I believe this country has a very bright future. I would, however, offer some criticism of his Department which I think is only fair. I am sure he will admit that there is a certain amount of truth in it.

It is said of civil servants that they have to be very careful about making a decision. If a decision has not been made before, the matter has to be considered very fully before making one. I honestly believe that at the present time many industries are being held up because the Minister—I must say "the Minister"—is not making a decision as quickly as he should in these matters. I believe the reason is that the country is going through a phase of industrial expansion which is new to the Department of Industry and Commerce. To a certain extent it resembles the phase which existed in the early days of Fianna Fáil but it is on a very much greater scale. I think that, if the Department would face up to it, the expansion would be far greater, and new industries could be established in this country far more quickly than they are being established at present.

The Minister made a tour of the U.S.A. He was criticised for it by a number of people on the Opposition Benches but I think that tour is bearing fruit. We must remember, however, that the American businessman just cannot sit around and twiddle his thumbs waiting for seven or eight months while the various sections of the Minister's Department make up their minds whether or not they will agree to certain conditions or lay down certain conditions. I appeal to the Minister—I know that he and his Department have all the goodwill in the world—to have these matters finalised as quickly as possible. I still think there is far too much time allowed to elapse before the decision is made as to what is desirable or possible in regard to bringing certain industries into this country.

Talking about the expansion of industry, we often seem to forget that there is a lot more being considered than industrial production for export. We should remember all the things which are needed here in everyday life which, for some unknown reason, are imported from abroad. We meet cases of that kind every day and we find that things which we need just cannot be made in Ireland. Sometimes it will appear as if there must be some special reason for this, but I do not think there is. I think that the industrialists here, even if they come in from outside, should be encouraged to try to supply such goods as we require which are not manufactured here. These may range from kiddies' toys to various types of wearables, including other items that one finds from day to day among the numerous things which are not made in this country, which could be made and which would give much needed employment.

There is another matter which I would like the Minister to bear in mind. It is the question of the furniture industry. In my constituency, we have what is called the home of the furnishing industry in Ireland. Recently things have not been so good there and some people say it is because of the fact that the restriction on hire purchase has affected that industry. Some of the manufacturers themselves tell me that is not the reason at all. I would ask the Minister to inquire deeply—he has already met representatives of the industry— into the cause of the present recession. It may be that, as in the motorcar industry, the requirements of the people for a certain period have been almost completely filled. I do not think that is so, but I know that at the present time a very serious situation is building up in the furniture industry and I ask the Minister to make whatever efforts he can, to have the matter rectified before it becomes any more serious.

The suggestion was made—this possibly may not come under the Minister for Industry and Commerce at all—as a solution, if it was the case that the restriction of hire purchase was affecting the matter, that the profits being made by the middlemen, the hire-purchase firms who handle the furniture, could be inquired into, because it is said that suites of furniture being made in Navan are being sold in Dublin City at nearly three times what the manufacturers are charging the retailers for them. That is a matter which might be investigated, because, if that is the position, the profits are surely excessive and something could be done to prevent that situation continuing.

I should like to refer to the mining industry which, in my opinion, is one of the bright stars in the present industrial development of the country. I was very interested to hear Deputy Lemass the other evening speaking on mining and to hear him refer to the fact that a survey had been carried out some years ago. He was surprised, he said, to find that all the mines which are now getting a lot of prominence were not recommended—I think that was the word——

Mr. Lemass

No, the three most promising were picked out. The others were not rejected in any sense, but were not regarded as most promising.

That is the point I wanted to make. There is a very good reason why those other mines were not either recommended or rejected. It is because for about 25 years, I understand, nobody had bothered to inspect the mines, and I am referring to Beauparc in particular. In County Meath, the Beauparc mine was not inspected by anybody except by sightseers who went along to see what it looked like. It had not been inspected for 25 years and it had not been worked since 1912, and yet we are told that the present mining people who are attempting to have it explored, have opened the mine and are getting on quite well, I understand. I do not think there is any good reason why they should not do so. I think we should welcome people who are prepared, if they think a mining venture is worth while, to spend money on it and they should be given all the encouragement possible to go ahead. Do not let us forget that those people who have opened mines at Beauparc, Allihies, Castleblayney and elsewhere, brought here a top geologist to inspect the mines and he went into the necessary details and satisfied himself, and through his reputation, satisfied the company backing him, that everything was all right and that it was a worthwhile venture.

We all know, of course, that things may turn out otherwise; that old mines may not be as good as people think they are, and if there is no copper there it cannot be put there. If there is no lead, as the case may be, that cannot be put there either. But if these people think the ore is there, I think it is only right, if they get somebody recommending the prospects, that they should spend money in development work. They have given considerable employment in these areas and I understand, if it turns out successful, as they hope it will, they will give employment at Beauparc to some 200 or 300 men. A somewhat smaller number will be employed at Castleblaney and Derryledeghan, and anything up to 1,000 at Allihies. That is quite a considerable number of men in rural areas where there is no other employment and I think the project is something that should get all possible encouragment from the members of this House. Nothing should be said in this House either by the Opposition or by Deputies on these benches which would tend to discourage these people from going further with the project. I am sure the people on the opposite benches are as anxious as we are to see things turning out right, but it is rather unfortunate that some things have been said in such a way that they can be read as an attempt to discourage people who wish to spend money exploring the mineral deposits of this country.

Deputy Collins referred to the need for encouraging the burning of native fuel and he mentioned particularly Bord na Móna turf and hand-won turf. I think there is a very good point there. I believe that many of the small bogs where turf was cut by the local people during the years of the emergency, not alone for themselves but also for sale in the neighbouring towns and villages, could be encouraged to start again. The responsibility rests on the Department to give every possible encouragement in that regard, and I would suggest that, if possible, small machines should be made available to those people, machines of the type which were used initially by Bord na Móna. These could be given either on a grant or loan basis, and I am sure the people would be prepared to pay for such machines because there is no doubt that there is a crying need in the rural areas, in the towns particularly, for some type of fuel to replace coal.

We must face up to it that if coal continues to increase in price, it will soon be, if it is not already, beyond the pocket of the ordinary person, not only in the rural areas, but in the towns and cities. A substitute must be found for it, and the substitute is there in turf. Every effort should be made to encourage people to cut and to sell as much turf as they possibly can.

On the subject of native fuel, the question of Irish coal also arises. Many people in this House smile when Irish coal is mentioned. They suggest it is something which just does not exist, except in one or two small areas. Many of us who have gone to the trouble of checking up on geological records have found there is quite a considerable number of coalfields in this country. Some of these might be described as bad, some as slightly better, and one or two as having good prospects for development.

One such coalfield exists between Carrickmacross, Kilmainham Wood and Drumconrath and Nobber. Local people have told me recently that they saw coal being taken out of the ground in that area and burned. I though possibly that it might be a reference to some type of black stone because it is very easy to get black slate which resembles coal, but which will not burn. They assured me, however, that this coal did burn. One old man there told me—it was near the village of Lobinstown—that in that area there was an open-cast mine which had been dug by two or three farmers when he was very young and out of which they had got good household coal. He said the mine had been closed by the "gauger". I did not recognise the expression at the time, but I later found that the gauger, of course, was the then excise officer. From that time on, the mine was not opened. The opening of the old mine is still there. It is not very deep, but coal was found in it. In the neighbourhood, coal has recently been taken up and burned. The evidence is there for anybody who wishes to see it. I checked on the old survey and found that a commissioner appointed by this House in 1922 established the fact that this coalfield was in existence in that area.

I suggest that the Department of Industry and Commerce would be spending their money wisely, if they made some attempt to find out what is the position there and elsewhere, so that coalfields of this type might be developed. I know I will hear the usual wisecracks about it; people will probably say I am making a statement that cannot be borne out by fact; but I think if the Department check what I have said, they will find there is coal there. Whether it is there in quantities big or good enough to be developed successfully, I do not know, but I ask that something be done about it. Other Deputies from the area are possibly as anxious as I am about the development of these coalfields and will probably speak on the subject later on.

There is in my constituency a very fine woollen mill run by the old firm of Claytons. They are doing very well, as are other similar firms who manufacture tweed and woollen goods. However, there must be something wrong, because I was informed recently that cloth described as Donegal tweed was found to have been manufactured in Japan. I understand a number of other people, including a member of the House, are aware of this fact. I believe something should be done to prevent anybody describing as Donegal tweed an article which is not made in Ireland. As I have said, Claytons have been doing very well over the years, although there was a recession at one time because of excessive imports. If Japan can send cloth into this country, there must be something wrong, and I would ask the officials of the Department to have the matter looked into.

Reference was made by Deputy S. Collins to the E.S.B. and to the desirability of having small pockets left by the board in the rural electrification scheme cleared up. It is unfortunate that the E.S.B. seem to make a special point of leaving a small number of houses in practically every area. The excuse is usually given that these pockets were not in the area scheduled and that it would not be economical to supply them with current at the same price as those covered by the original scheme. Afterwards, these people are supplied with electricity, if they are prepared to pay an excessive charge.

I should like to point out that those people have been canvassed by official E.S.B. canvassers who tell them they can get current at the usual charges. Some of those people go to the expense of having their houses wired, only to find later that they will not be connected, unless they pay exorbitant prices. Something should be done to iron out these small pockets. It would not cost a great deal of money to have all these houses included in the scheme.

Deputy Childers talked about emigration and said there would have to be a radical change in order to prevent the present trend of emigration from continuing. Perhaps it would be unkind of me to suggest that Deputy Childers had a long period during which he could have given this problem the serious attention he now says it deserves. Possibly he did not realise the necessity for it at that time. While we must bear our share of what blame there is for the present volume of emigration, surely the people on the opposite benches must bear their share for the emigration that occurred during their period in office. Blaming one side or another will not make very much difference to the people who are forced to leave the country.

There are two reasons why people leave here. People leave because they cannot get jobs, but several people also leave who have jobs, but get wages on which they can barely live. I believe that until we have reached the stage where both employer and employee agree on the amount which the worker must get in order to provide the little extra which makes so much difference, people will still leave their jobs in this country and emigrate.

Follow that up with a little more work.

Deputy Giles wants a little more work. If Deputy Giles will point out to me where the extra work is needed, perhaps I might be able to help him. As far as I can see, it is very easy to criticise workers destructively, but it must be realised that the man who tries to live upon his week's wages has very little. The sooner both employee and employer realise that the worker who has given 20 or 30 years of service to an industry must get something more than a dismissal notice when he is too old to work any longer. I agree that the manufacturer is entitled to a fair return for the money he puts into an industry, but so also is a worker, without whose honest effort the industry could not have been maintained. The workers are entitled to a little more consideration than they are getting from the employers of this country.

Reference has been made to the question of setting up a chemical industry in this country. I should like to press the claims of Meath if the industry is being set up. I know that the Midlands did stake their claim to have this industry established there and I hope it will not be too much to suggest that the Kingscourt area would make an ideal location for it. It would give a considerable amount of employment, as well as saving the country a tremendous amount in imports. There is a gypsum industry there which did give a big lot of employment. Employment in that industry has been cut considerably by the introduction of automation; where 300 men were employed some years ago, only 100 now work, and there is the danger that employment will fall even more. Because those people so disemployed would otherwise have to leave the country, I suggest the Minister would carefully consider setting up the chemical industry there.

Deputy Childers also referred to the wonderful co-operation which existed in England and the U.S.A. between trade unions and employers' organisations. I challenge Deputy Childers or anyone else to suggest there is not a better spirit of co-operation between the trade unions and the employers in this country than in any other country in the world. It is unfortunate that Deputy Childers, who admitted he was not quite sure of his facts, should make what I consider to be a one-sided attack on the trade union movement. All the trade unions here are prepared to co-operate to the fullest with the employers, if a spirit of give-and-take and goodwill is displayed by the employers as well as the employees.

I have listened to many speeches here this evening and the most significant comment in them all is that if somebody does something we shall get somewhere. I said before in a speech here that I would never ask the Minister to do something but that I would endeavour to suggest a way out of a difficulty that might arise. It is futile for Deputies to say in this House that "the Minister should do something".

The Minister's Department is responsible for shipping. Irish Shipping, Limited, was started by the Department of Industry and Commerce and I was here when the Minister mentioned the programme in relation to ships that were being built and ships which are about to be delivered. There are three 2,000-ton vessels. They are welcome because they can go into small ports and I am sure they will earn plenty of money as colliers for Irish Shipping. Irish Shipping had £290,000 profit last year, which is all to the good. There are three vessels of 9,000 tons to be launched this year, and three more on order for 1957.

I would particularly draw the Minister's attention to something that occurred during the term of office of his predecessor, Deputy Lemass. Deputy Lemass came to my constituency to declare open a newly-constructed jetty. That night at a dinner in the Grand Hotel in Tramore he mentioned that Irish Shipping had a programme for ships of some 9,000 and 10,000 tons. This was a bit of a shock and we drew his attention to the fact that none of these 10,000 ton vessels would ever tie up at the jetty he had opened. I must give Deputy Lemass credit for the fact that he met us on this question. A short time afterwards, at his request, a deputation from the Waterford Harbour Commissioners met the general manager of Irish Shipping and the overall length of the Irish Hazel was reduced to 456 feet and this craft of 9,500 tons can be discharged at the ports of Dublin, Waterford, Cork and Limerick. I would particularly draw the Minister's attention to that fact, because I asked the Minister a question in the House as to what ports in this State can accommodate fully laden ships of 10,000 tons. The answer was: “The Port of Dublin”. That is something that should not be allowed to slip so that we would find ourselves with a fleet of ships that could only enter one port in the State.

I would also ask the Minister to examine the possibility of making a recommendation to Irish Shipping, Limited in regard to the supply of a fleet of small coasters which could carry small quantities of cargo from Dublin to various ports which cannot take the big ships, for instance, Waterford, Limerick or Cork. As I am on the subject of ships, let me refer to the matter of river steamers. There was a service of river steamers on many rivers in the country and it was discontinued for one reason or another.

The Minister has put the river boats back on the Shannon and I went to see one of these boats in operation. I was unable to board one of them as I believe they are over-subscribed and are a great success. I would like to compliment the Minister on that. It is a pity to have rivers there and not to operate steamers on them which are a great source of income to the country and an important tourist amenity.

On the Rivers Suir, Barrow and Nore there were boats in the days before World War I. The time has come when the Minister should consider putting a service on those rivers and on the Blackwater from Youghal to Cappoquin. I do not think even Youghal Bridge would interfere with that. The Blackwater is one of the most beautiful rivers in Ireland and to use boats of the same type as are on the Shannon would be a great tourist amenity. The same remarks would apply to my native City of Waterford where I often enjoyed going down the river to Duncannon and Dunmore on the steamers we had years ago. In view of the success which has been achieved on the Shannon I hope the Minister will consider carefully restoring the steamers to the rivers in County Waterford.

In relation to tourism, Waterford is a great tourist area. We have an entry port to which people come from Great Britain and we have some very fine resorts such as Dunmore, Tramore, Clonea, Dungarvan and Ardmore. I do not know whether the Minister's Department has the allotting of grants, but there are very substantial grants given for tourist roads and Waterford is in receipt of the lowest amount allotted to any county. As I say, Waterford is an entry port. I listened to the Minister answering some questions here a couple of weeks ago as regards the cross-Channel passenger traffic and the Minister's answers seemed to cover only the traffic to Dún Laoghaire and the Port of Dublin. He had to be reminded by a Deputy from Cork that there was also a service from Fishguard to Cork. He had to be reminded by a Deputy from Wexford that there was also a service to Rosslare and I had to remind him that there was a service to Waterford.

It is with a certain amount of alarm that I read the Minister's speech that he had a conference with the Chairman of the London-Midland Area Board of British Railways. I take it that the man who holds that position came from the old London, Midland and Scottish Railways and that he could only see traffic to Ireland by the London Mail from Euston to Holyhead and over to Dublin. As a result of this conference British Railways are putting on 25 extra trips to Dublin during the summer season and four from Fishguard to Rosslare. There will be no extra trips to Waterford or Cork. We are constantly reading of the overcrowding at Dún Laoghaire and at Dublin at the peak holiday season. The main reason for that is that British Railways are advertising for the people to travel that way. We in this House have tried to get British Railways to make people conscious that there are alternative services.

In the matter of tourism, I think that the value of the cross-Channel tourist is now recognised and that the greater portion of our tourist trade comes from Scotland, England and Wales. Efforts were made by the previous Government to lengthen the holiday season. I submit that the season must be lengthened. The people will come here from mid-July and around August in their thousands, but we can cater for them better in May and June if we can get them to come. There was an experiment last year with lower fares on cars coming to Ireland. That was a great success and I submit, and I would like the Minister to remember it, that the Minister should endeavour to have these lower fares offered also in the months of May and June. I have no doubt that that would be about the best initial step to lengthen the season.

Deputy Childers mentioned the insufficient development of industry and more or less blamed the Minister for bringing in foreigners. I am sure Deputies down the country did not care where they came from if they started industries which gave good employment. Deputy Lemass commenced a great industrial drive in this country and, throwing everything he had into it, gave a good deal of protection. He had to, but, as time went on, industrialists took advantage of that protection. They were in a protective hot-house and they used the protection that they got from this State and this House as a weapon, not only to protect themselves from outside industry but to hold a pistol to the heads of the Irish people.

It has been stated by Deputy Childers that the only way industry can prosper is by increased production. I agree with him but there are too many industrialists in this country who made money out of decreased production. They had started an industry, they were quite sure of themselves and they were protected. Even when the Ministers, present and past, realised they were not doing what they should, they came with a "hit-me-now-with-the-child-in-my-arms" attitude and the plea that they would have to get an increase in the tariff.

A number of these industries are there now for the past 20 odd years and it is time that they were weaned from the sucking bottle. An investigation should take place to ascertain what any industrialists who are not exporting are doing behind their tariff wall and to see if they are giving the people of the country value for the protection they are getting. The industrialists in this country have propaganda journals and the main line they seem to take is attacking farmers and farming. Agriculture they say is the Cinderella in glad rags.

I will have to go back again to tourism. A matter which should be drawn to the attention of An Bord Fáilte is that we are constantly listening to good radio programmes in which countries such as Italy advertise their attractiveness. I want to praise the technique I hear in Irish advertising programmes. They are good and while they might not be as aesthetic as some people might like them to be, people will listen to them. I think Bord Fáilte should take time on Radio Eireann and initiate a series of broadcasts for the promotion of tourism in this country.

In regard to souvenirs we all know that the Japanese are the biggest suppliers of Irish souvenirs. I saw some souvenirs recently which were made here in Ireland and they were magnificent. I was with some Americans and they bought as many of them as they could get. They were made in the West of Ireland and included lovely shawls, blouses with Limerick lace and various articles in Irish linen. They were beautifully made, the prices were all right but the drawback is that there is not sufficient of them. I am not asking the Minister to do something about this. I know he has officials working on the matter, but I would say to Irish manufacturers that they should look into this end of the matter and any concern manufacturing anything in the way of clothing or furniture should explore the possibilities of making good class souvenirs. We have recognised souvenirs which people take back with them—bottles of whiskey and Waterford glass—and that is a side of the tourist trade that should be fostered in every possible way. I would say that industrialists should look to it and endeavour to produce something on these lines and forget the tariff walls surrounding them. It would be a great thing if some day we could smash some of these walls and let these people feel the chill. It might wake them up.

In regard to mines, my colleague, Deputy Kyne, and I asked the Minister a question two weeks ago. I am very glad that a survey is being made in my constituency where copper was worked in living memory and where the pitheads remain. Our history tells us that the Earl of Cork mined iron in the west of Waterford and in the east of Cork in the early years up to the Cromwellian wars and laid the foundations of his fortune. It is said that one of the reasons why he was encouraged to mine iron there was that he would have to burn the woods for charcoal to smelt the iron and that the more woods he cut, the less place there was for Irishmen on the run to hide. The point is that there was iron there.

Finally, I would mention something that I mentioned here before and which Deputies on both sides of the House have referred to, namely the decentralisation of industry. Industries do more or less seem to spring up in Dublin. Industrialists want to stay near the best of the golf clubs. We lost an industry in Waterford through not having as good a golf club as they have in Dublin. Industrialists, when they become directors and managing directors, would prefer the Shelbourne Hotel and the Gresham and these places to the smaller hotels they were in the habit of visiting and having pints in the snug in their early days.

I want to say again to the Minister that where the Government are putting up the money or most of the money or where the Government are giving licences, whenever possible, industrialists should be told that the Government would be prepared to give them an even better concession if they would establish the industry down the country or in the West of Ireland. I have seen dying towns on the western seaboard and was inclined to be very sorry for them until I came to my own constituency and discovered that the fine towns of Lismore, Cappoquin, Tallow, Ardmore, and Dunmore are dying also. There is not an industry in any of them, with the exception of a small industry in Cappoquin. That is a very serious matter.

If boys and girls come from the West of Ireland to seek work in Dublin, it is only another step for them to go to England. The great thing to keep people at home is the availability of employment at their doors. It is a great thing economically and a great thing for the agricultural community that there should be employment available to boys and girls at home. Living in Waterford City and being in touch with the farming community there, I have seen the difference that it made to the prosperity of the small farmer when his sons and daughters were able to work in the adjoining City of Waterford or the adjoining town. The sons and daughters brought back the money to him every Friday and brought prosperity to him that he had never known before. Many people are emigrating because they are able to earn money in England and because there is no work available in their own area and, as I have said, it is as easy for them to go to England as to go to Waterford or Dublin.

There seems to be a great desire on the part of Deputies to get industries established in their respective constituencies. That is very understandable. A very strong appeal is being made from various sources throughout the country for the establishment of industries. That is an indication that emigration is not voluntary but is forced upon the people through the absence of employment. One of the great drawbacks is our lack of raw materials for industry. The availability of raw materials in the locality in which the industry is established gives the particular industrialist a decided advantage over one who has to transport his raw materials over a long distance.

In that connection, how far have the Government examined the question of raw materials that are available in the country that could usefully be used for the manufacture of goods for home consumption and for export? For instance, what steps are they taking to locate mineral deposits?

Undoubtedly, agriculture is the primary industry and nothing should be done that would retard further expansion of that industry. Any Government that is anxious for the welfare of the State will use every means at its disposal to expand agriculture, the industry that has maintained the country over centuries and is still maintaining it, and that is our only means of carrying on our business.

The question of mineral development is of the utmost importance. Minerals are a gift from nature and their production does not require the arduous labour and cost that is involved in the production of agricultural produce. The farmer has to till, manure and plant. Nature has deposited valuable minerals in the earth. If we have minerals in any abundance, we have a profitable source of wealth. The Government should concentrate on a survey of mineral deposits in this country.

There are in this country vast deposits of iron ore. The deposits may be very mediocre in quality. In these days of scientific progress, that defect of nature could be overcome. Side by side with that iron ore deposit, there is a fair quantity of coal. These two are essential in any development that takes place and advantage should, therefore, be taken of both of them. Some months ago I gave the Minister the address of an American from some of the universities over there. He was interested in the problem of emigration from this country and he told me —I thought it rather strange—that in America they also have the problem of a flight from the land. He told me that in his neighbourhood they were using very successfully an iron ore of a rather mediocre quality; I think he said 28 per cent. I understand that ours ranges from 26 to 30 per cent. Possibly the Minister has tried to locate the gentleman in question to get all the information he can from him but, with what success, I do not know.

It is up to us to do all we can to develop our own minerals. Sliabh an Iarainn means the Mountain of Iron; iron exists there in vast quantities. Over 200 years ago there was an iron foundry there and wrought iron gates erected at the entrance to demesnes, manufactured in that foundry, are still standing. Many other iron products are still in existence in that area. What happened that industry I do not know. Possibly it had to give way in face of more modern methods of production in England and elsewhere. To-day we can bring to our aid all the improvements that have been made in mining technique and the scientific data that have been gleaned over the years in relation to such minerals. I suggest to the Minister that this potential development calls for immediate attention. The ore exists in close proximity to coal. I understand 18½ cwt. of this coal is equivalent to 20 cwt. of English or Scotch coal. It is difficult to ignite and, from that point of view, it is not attractive to the housewife, but it is used in the sugar factories and has proved altogether excellent there.

The possibilities should be examined. Not alone are there mineral deposits in Sliabh an Iarainn and Arigna but there are mineral deposits all over Leitrim. I believe that when the iron foundry was in operation the ore had to be blended and, in order to get a suitable blend, ore had to be brought by horse and cart from Rooskey, 30 miles away. That was a long distance. It shows the amount of research, examination and investigation which must have taken place in those far-off days in order to find a suitable blending ore. Blending is an important factor in achieving the best results. Two hundred years ago science was not as advanced as it is to-day and, from that point of view, these mineral deposits represent a fruitful source of potential employment. There is, too, soapstone, sandstone, ochre and other minerals. Offhand, I cannot say how many there are. But all these should be investigated and surveyed.

I was told by a very eminent man who visited the country some years ago that there was evidence that nature did not pursue a completely normal course when that area was settling down and, therefore, minerals do not lie in the ordered way in which they should—limestone, sandstone, rocks and minerals. Due to volcanic eruptions the strata do not follow the usual recognised pattern and it might be an excellent idea if we departed somewhat from the general line laid down by geologists.

We all thought when we gained our independence that our economic problems would be speedily solved. We believed there was a golden harvest to be reaped from industrial production and so forth. We have learned the hard realities. Industries do not promise untold wealth. The establishment of industries does not, of itself, make a nation wealthy. We have to find the men to build the industries, the workers to work them and, in the last analysis, a market in which to sell our products. Producing for one's own needs is probably the greatest incentive there is to laziness. Unless the people who run the industry and the workers who man it are sufficiently civic-spirited we cannot reach the acme of industrial production.

Protection was essential for those industries in the beginning and it is still essential for new industries, but there must be a warning issued that this country will not countenance laziness on the part of directors, or experts or workers. They must all combine to produce under fair conditions and to reach a standard of production that will enable them to compete and sell in competition with any producer of a similar article elsewhere.

There is no use in thinking that the building of fine premises and the installing of fine plant is a national asset. It is the product we produce that is the asset and these things can only become assets when they are produced under the expert knowledge of people who are prepared to work and to produce as good an article as cheaply as it can be produced anywhere else.

The only one industry that has maintained this standard is agriculture. It has borne the brunt of it all. It has had to train the workers for the new industries we started, it has had to pay the dividends of those who invested in those concerns and so on. Agriculture has got no return for all that. At the moment, our farmers have a guaranteed market for their butter, but they have been driven out of other production by protection as it is applied here. The cost of the raw materials of the agricultural industry went up in price, while the cost of the farmers' products went down. Agriculture is not understood in this country and what the farmer has done in this country is much underestimated. The Irish farmer and the Irish worker on the land must be the best in the world. While working under rather primitive conditions, at least up to recent years, they had to compete with outsiders and they had to assist the industrial revival in this country by paying a high price for what they had to buy, while they secured no benefit whatever from it.

There are other industries, apart from the ones which have been mentioned. There is the tourist industry which is a very great industry indeed, but, here again, I must say that, like a good many good things that come to this country, there are some sections that pay for them and receive a corresponding benefit, while there are other sections which also pay but receive no benefit at all. There is practically no benefit at all to the smaller towns and rural parts of the country from the tourist who comes from America. That the country people have to pay for them is true; they have to pay for all the advertisements and propaganda.

Dublin and some other cities get the money, but, personally, I do not think the country districts get any benefit at all from this expenditure of money. I think that a lot of this stuff is propaganda of a nonsensical kind for the spending of a lot of money. Later on, I will be asking some questions as to the results from the tourist traffic up to date. I hope I will be disappointed when I get the replies, but I am afraid that I will find it is only being worked up for the benefit of the few and not for the nation as a whole. I think the tourist industry is no good to the nation.

Our provincial towns are in grave danger of being eliminated. There is a fall in population in many parts of the country which is alarming. I do not know who is to blame for that. Our whole economy is to blame. The standards of living in the cities and towns have been a damning example to the population of the rural areas. Why should they continue to live in dirty dumps and slovenly conditions and see electricity lighting up the towns and villages and see the lights of Dublin lighting up the whole countryside? We now have a Government that is responsible for undertaking and planning of these great schemes. What are they going to do to keep the people from leaving the country?

Our towns are dwindling rapidly. Recently we have had the travelling shops started again. No country person will now come into the towns in a horse and cart like he did in the old days. He does not need to come in now because the travelling shops bring the goods into the houses. That is an excellent thing for the rural population. They are providing a good service and doing something that the country people have wanted for a long time, but if the business leaves the towns, nothing is substituted for it and what is going to happen? Even the markets and fairs are falling. The cattle are now being sold at the cattle sales and the pigs are being brought direct to the factory. All that is a loss to the towns. No industry is being provided in these towns and there is no thought on the part of the Government for the problem.

As the tendency is going at present, two-thirds of the towns in this country will, in from five to ten years, cease to serve any useful purpose and will cease to provide a living for those now living in them. What happens if the towns are eliminated and there is no alternative provided for the people? The rates have to be paid and the towns are highly valued. The people in the towns are prompt payers of their rates. If they have no business, the people in the towns will have no money to pay their rates and they will be uncollected. That will mean that an additional burden will be thrown on the workers and on to the small and large farmers. The matter is one of high and serious import and what has the Government done to tackle this dangerous position? Nobody seems to have an answer to the problem, but the people are moving out at an alarming rate and in another few years the problem will be one that will stifle this country. A state of emergency should be declared until this whole problem of emigration existing at the moment has been dealt with.

Seán Mac Eochagáin

Do bhí áthas orm nuair do chuala mé an tAire dhá rá go raibh sé ag dul ar aghaidh leis on stáisíun móna ag Scríb. Tá a lán móna i gConamara ach tá na daoine ag imeacht leo as na ceantracha seo go tiugh gach lá. Ní inniu ná inné a thosaíodar ag imeacht leo go Sasana.

Do bhí áthas orm freisin a chloisteáil go raibh airgead leagtha amach le haghaidh deasú na mbóithre beaga. Cuirfidh sin ar chumas na ndaoine an mhóin a bhaint agus í a thabhairt isteach go dtí an stáisiún. Ba chóir an obair sin a thosaí láithreach mar "ní hé lá na gaoithe lá na scolb". Ní cheart deasú na mbóithre a fhágáil go dtí go mbeidh an stáisiún ag obair. Anois an t-am le tosaí ag obair ar na bóithre ghá ndeasú. Ní fhaca mise fós aon bhóthar beag ghá dheasú faoin airgead seo. Tá seans ag an Rialtas an t-airgead seo a úsáid agus bail a chur ar na bóithre beaga atá ag dul isteach go dtí na portaigh. Dá ndéantaí sin thabharfadh sé seans do no daoine fanacht sa mbaile ag baint na móna le haghaidh an stáisiúin seo.

I wish to deal only with one matter— the power station at Screebe and the power stations in other places. I was glad to learn from the Minister's opening statement that the station is going ahead. There had been a rumour that, when this Government took office, it was their intention to try to kill the station. If that was the intention, I am glad to see that the whole idea has been changed and that they are going ahead with the station.

I am glad to see also that a sum of £80,000 is provided for the building of roads into the bogs. I asked a number of questions in this House on several occasions concerning the roads, especially the roads leading into the bogs where we are expected to cut 30,000 tons of turf annually in order to keep the stations going. Every day I see people leaving the country for England and we hear a lot of talk about emigration. The people in the West are only delighted to see the station erected, but the drawback of the whole matter is that if they cut the turf on the bogs, they will be unable to bring it out. The sum of £80,000 is earmarked for the building of roads, but I can tell the Minister and the Government that, so far, I have not seen any bog road started or existing roads brought to such a standard that people will be able to get into the bogs to cut the turf for the station. One should not, as I said in Irish, wait for the stormy day to go out and thatch one's house. If these stations, particularly the station at Screebe, is to be ready and in production by the end of the year, the roads should already be commenced.

After all, the station is supposed to burn approximately 30,000 tons of turf annually, but if there are no bog roads, surely the Government and the Minister cannot expect the people to cut their turf in bogs from which it cannot be brought out. There are stretches of bog from Screebe to Maam Bridge, Toombeola to Ballinaboy, Oughterard to Sheana Thoistín and north of the Maam valley. They are not drained, nor are there any roads. The people of Connemara are finding it very difficult to get enough turf to keep themselves going. They cannot bring the turf out of the bogs even with a horse and cart, not to speak of lorries.

If we are serious about the stations going ahead, the first step we should take is to build the roads immediately and make them passable for lorries bringing turf to the stations. When the Minister is replying, I should like him to say what class of turf will be used in connection with these stations. I understood that, while turf of a certain moisture content was accepted, £2 10s. per ton was not paid for it.

No later than a week ago, two lorries of turf arrived for the station at Screebe. One lorry went in on the weigh-bridge and was weighed. The man in charge said the turf contained so much moisture that he could not accept the load. The result was that the driver of the lorry went away with his load of turf to another part of the country and sold the turf. I do not know who has the final word as to whether the turf is dry or wet, or what should be paid for turf with a certain amount of moisture. But certainly the case I have mentioned is a matter which should be investigated if we are to have the stations working smoothly and if we want to get as great an output as we can.

There are one or two matters arising on this Estimate upon which I should like to comment but, before doing so, I feel that the facts and figures given by the Minister in regard to industrial production in terms of employment of both money value and real value over the past eight years are something which do not, and should not, lead to complacency, but which should not lead either to unusual gloom. There is no doubt that complacency would be dangerous in regard to industrial production in this country or with regard to anything.

At the same time, we should not fall into the opposite error of looking with too much depression on the undoubted achievements which we have accomplished since the war. I think the figures which we had from the Minister in his statement introducing the Estimate show a constant upward trend tested by any one of three methods—tested by actual employment, by money or by comparative money values. That is something which shows a healthy trend. What we are much more concerned with is the equalisation of movement in the right direction than the altering of the direction of a movement or a progress.

With regard to the individual items of the Estimate, there is one with which this Minister in this Estimate is particularly concerned and which requires particular attention at present. That is the question of the provision of fuel for urban dwellers for ordinary domestic cooking and heating. We are blind if we do not appreciate the fact and plan on the basis that imported coal, either from Great Britain or elsewhere, is not likely to be available in the future in the supply and at a price which will be usable, except as a partly luxury commodity. I think, apart from any temporary recession in the production of coal or temporary fluctuation in the price of coal, coming either from England or the U.S.A., everything we see going on in the coal producing countries should lead us to the conclusion that, so long as a situation exists in which labour has to be tempted into coal mines with special attractions and unusual inducements to work and so long as transport costs keep rising at the present rate, we will not get coal in the future in this country—we may get it for the next few years—at a price and in a quantity which will be suitable or reasonably within the capacity of a large number of the domestic users of coal.

I think our whole approach to the fuel problem in this country should be based on the acceptance of that fact. It is something outside our control, something which we cannot affect either by bargaining or manoeuvring in any market condition, and it is something to which particular policy in respect of two or three items of the matters under the Minister's control should be framed to meet, possibly not in this year or next year but certainly in five, six, seven or eight years hence. If you accept the premises which I put forward that we will have to face the situation in which we will have to produce or try to produce a fuel for cooking and heating for ordinary domestic users living in towns and cities at a figure reasonably within the compass of the incomes of those people and that we will have to do that without the assistance of imported coal, it seems to me there are at least two matters, or possibly three, dealt with in this Estimate which are particularly relevant on that.

The first of these is, obviously, the general policy of Bord na Móna. No matter for what purpose Bord na Móna was set up, it should be now guided principally towards the function of securing and producing turf for our cities and towns in a form at a price that will make it acceptable to people for ordinary domestic use. There are two main problems to be surmounted in that. The first is that undoubtedly, in Dublin, anyway, there is a large-scale prejudice against ordinary turf, which results from the necessarily, probably inevitably, bad turf experienced during the war years. That prejudice must be broken down and the only way that can be done is by producing an article in good condition, at reasonable prices and with some facilities for the purchase and storage of it.

Without any expert or special knowledge, I greatly doubt that you will ever sell in large quantities to ordinary people living in the heart of the city what is called machine-won turf or even hand-won turf—the sort of turf we know. I believe that storage difficulties, lack of cleanliness and the cubic quantity in which it has to be bought make it most unacceptable. You will not sell it in that condition until the difference in the price between it and coal becomes so sharp that people are forced to buy it. It would appear to a person with no special knowledge that the real answer to this problem is the turf briquette, and I would ask the Minister to consider, as a matter of general policy, seeking the particular attention and directing the particular emphasis of the activities of Bord na Móna to the production and sale in, say, Dublin, with which I am particularly concerned, of turf briquettes at a reasonable price and in a reasonable way.

If I am right in assuming that outside conditions are going to lead to a situation in which coal will not be imported at price and in quantity suitable for the ordinary domestic user— and I think that is the situation towards which we are heading—the obvious substitute as far as we are concerned is some form of compressed and cleaned turf. The present form we know is the turf briquette. I feel that particular emphasis and particular stress should be placed by Bord na Móna on the sale and distribution of such a commodity and, if necessary, an advertising campaign to put across that idea to people living in Dublin and in other towns and cities.

If this problem is not grasped now, I have a feeling that it will become an acute problem at a stage when Bord na Móna or any other organisation will not be geared or will not be so organised as to be able to cope with it. The other way in which this fuel question may be met—and it is a matter which concerns this Department again—is the question of the production of coal in one form or another from our own native mines. Experience so far would seem to indicate that they, at best, would meet only whatever industrial needs there are for coal and that normally we would not get produced at a price which is sufficiently competitive in Dublin coal from native mines for use in ordinary open hearths, domestic cookers and so on. It may be that future advances in methods of mining may lead to a situation in which that may exist.

I am making this single point arising out of the details of the Estimate, and I would appeal very strongly indeed to the Minister to approach it on the basis that we will have a problem in respect of people living in cities, particularly living in flats and small dwellings, people without storage space and people without any particular facilities for buying ordinary fuel in large quantities. I do not believe that for a very considerable period we will break that down by introducing people to any form of central heating or closed fire. I believe the passion of the ordinary person is for an open fire and some form of that, whether for heating or cooking, will survive many economic pressures. Therefore, we should approach the problem on the basis that the people will want something they can burn in an open grate, over which they can cook, such as a range or open grate. They require that in Dublin and other cities and towns at a sufficiently reasonable price and capable of being conveniently distributed to make it worth while. That is the only point I would like to make on this Estimate this evening. It seems to me to be something of peculiar importance and to be especially the concern of this Department.

I move to report progress.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.
The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 27th June, 1956.
Top
Share