The Taoiseach, to conclude.
Adjournment Debate. - Economic Position (resumed).
Deputy Lemass, at the commencement of his speech this morning, on this debate, asserted that he thought that the year 1956 would be recorded in history as one of the worst years which this State has experienced since its establishment. Whether or not that statement be true, there can be no doubt that the year 1956 presented this Government with difficulties and problems which faced no other Irish Government since this State was established. Whatever view may be taken of the manner in which this Government have faced and tackled those difficulties and problems, there can be no doubt that those difficulties and problems existed and I assert that there can be no doubt that those difficulties and problems existed through no fault of the present Government. They were not due to anything that we did or omitted to do, or that we failed or neglected to have done.
Taking into account the fact, which cannot be denied, that there were very serious difficulties confronting the country economically and financially during the last year, we would have been entitled to expect, and I think the country would have hoped, that the Opposition would have faced this debate to-day in a serious and responsible mood, thinking not of their own political Party advantage but of the good of the country as a whole. That is what the country was entitled to get from the Opposition: that is what it has not got in to-day's debate. That is what it has not got since these difficulties began to appear and since they became more and more serious.
We were told during the course of the debates in March and July of this year, when the Government, through the Minister for Finance, introduced in this House the measures which they deemed necessary to meet with and cope with these difficulties and trials, that the Opposition, much as they disliked the present Government—Deputy de Valera forgot himself so far as to say that he detested this Government —would help us and help the country in its trials.
I want to say here, at the outset of my remarks, that from the time these difficulties appeared until the present, so far from giving one single piece of help to the Government or to the country in the nation's difficulties, the Opposition have set themselves out in every possible way, at every time, and in every direction, not merely to embarrass the Government but to prevent the Government or the country from taking, and submitting to, the necessary steps to retrieve the economic and financial ills that were affecting this country. In spite of their hypocritical suggestion that they were going to help, they never gave us the slightest help, nor the slightest constructive suggestion at any time.
It is part of the democratic system, on which the smooth working of the democratic machine depends, that there should be an Opposition which will do its duty to the country. The democratic machine requires a Government and it requires an Opposition. That Opposition does not fulfil its duty to the country by carping, destructive criticism; it must give some constructive suggestions or proposals, particularly in circumstances such as affected the country in the last 12 months. Day after day the Order Paper of this House has been filled to overflowing with questions designed not to help the economy or the finance of the country, not to give courage and heart to the people in their trials and difficulties, but in order to suggest that the evils afflicting the economy and the finance of the country were entirely the fault of the Government and that the Opposition should reap the harvest or the crop that has been set with the heavy toil of the present Government over the past 12 months.
If there had been anything wrong with the measures taken by the Government to deal with the unemployment and financial situation and to cope with the problem of the imbalance of our international trade, it was the duty of the Opposition to point out where we were going wrong and to suggest measures different from those which we were taking to cope with the situation. Instead of that, we had the Opposition unanimously agreeing to, and accepting, every measure taken by this Government to cope with the difficulties, financial and economic, that were confronting us. We got a unanimous vote in March and we got another in July. Neither in March nor in July, nor since, either inside this House or outside it, has there been any suggestion that measures taken by the Government were not the correct measures, nor has there been any indication given that the Party opposite, the Fianna Fáil Party, had they been in Government here during the last 12 months, would have taken other, different, or better methods. We are entitled to say, therefore, to the country, and I believe the country understands it now, that we took the proper measures which had to be taken, that we as a Government, an inter-Party Government—a Coalition Government if you like to call us that—were strong enough in times of stress and trial to stand the strain put upon us and to take unpopular measures which were deemed necessary in the national interest.
Then the Party opposite set themselves out merely to fish in the troubled waters and to try to gain for themselves political party advantage at the nation's expense. We would have thought that, even to-day, when Deputy Lemass speaks of the necessity for holding a general election, and says that this Government should be made do some work during the holidays, or what are called the holidays, we would have got some constructive suggestion from him or some of his colleagues. Throughout the whole course of the debate, we heard no constructive criticism, nothing but carping criticism and the lowest form of political propaganda. Therefore, I say that the Fianna Fáil Opposition deserves badly from the country. It has failed in its duty as an Opposition and I assert, too, with confidence, that the people will recognise that we have done our duty.
Give them the chance.
We will give them the chance when I deem it proper and when we have brought our policy to fruition. I will deal with that matter before I sit down, if I have time.
The limpet policy.
Order!
Fianna Fáil would not come back anyway.
That is what you are afraid of.
It has been the fashion for Fianna Fáil to decry myself and my colleagues in the Government, and to use all the epithets they could think of in their descriptions of us, in an attempt to show how we could not possibly succeed when put to the test in a time of difficulty. We have at least proved to the country that we are able to face difficulties in a way that no Fianna Fáil Government would ever have been able to face them. I want to interpolate a tribute to my colleagues here: I have worked with them now for five and a half years, two and a half years with my present colleagues and three years with some of them in the first inter-Party Government, my Labour colleagues and my farmer colleagues, and I can say this with absolute confidence—never during all that time had we the slightest measure of bitterness or disagreement.
During the last 12 months, we worked, not as Deputy Lemass would have people think, doing nothing, but day and night facing the problems we had to face. We worked as a team in a way that Fianna Fáil never worked, and never could work, and at least we have reached the position now that, having tackled the problem, we can see some hopeful signs of recovery and some hope that we can now plan the policy that I indicated in my speech on the 5th October of this year, and to which Deputy Lemass made a few slighting references.
We have come to the country now at the end of this hard, tough year with something to show and some hope for the country, and above all with this hope for the country—that Fianna Fáil will never again inflict themselves as a Government on the country.
We looked for an alternative to the policy of Fianna Fáil. Deputy Lemass may make slighting references to the speech I made. That speech was not as full, or as comprehensive, as a plan for long-term economic policy might be, but at least it was a policy, and it was not a policy confined merely to the pages of a booklet or pamphlet. It was not merely a number of pious platitudes or pious hopes, but it was a policy of definite proposals, and in the short time that has elapsed since this Parliament reassembled in the autumn of this year, in practically every single case, we have put that policy into concrete shape. We have passed a Bill through the Dáil to give that incentive to the export trade which is so vitally urgent and necessary in order to remedy our economy. We have given incentives to industry, to mining, and above all to agriculture, which is so vitally necessary.
What alternative policy have the Opposition put forward? We have it from the Fianna Fáil Ard Fheis that they have no policy. Where is the policy of Deputy Lemass for spending an additional £90,000,000 to £100,000,000 without recourse to taxation or savings? Where is that policy that was flourished here——
It is now with the trade union congresses.
Where are the proposals for spending £90,000,000 to £100,000,000 that were outlined by Deputy Lemass last year? Nobody knows where they are to get that money. Everybody knows that the Tory finance policy of Deputy MacEntee is opposed to that policy. We have here, at least, the situation that we have a concrete policy and concrete proposals on which the people can judge and on which——
But you will not let the people judge.
——we are prepared to be judged, but which will take time to operate. Against that, we have Deputy Lemass's flamboyant scheme for full employment, for getting £90,000,000 to £100,000,000, which if put into operation, would cause the greatest inflation that any country ever heard of, and the greatest unemployment that ever afflicted any Government. But, of course, it got no further than the pamphlet. Knowing Deputy Lemass, it is the type of thing that we are accustomed to hear from him.
We come here now, having done our duty and able to show the result of what we have done, and able to show that we can at least see the light. I do not say to the people that we have a cure for every ill, or that we have cured all the ills, but what I do assert is that we have reached the point where we can plan for that expansion which is vitally necessary if we are to get out of our financial difficulties.
We started out on three lines of policy early in this year when it became apparent that the country was faced with serious economic and financial troubles. Our first task was to deal with the imbalance of payments, to tackle that as everybody knows now, by means of the levies. Those proposals, I repeat, got unanimous support from this House. Those were the first measures we had to take. Those measures were necessary when it became evident in the early part of this year, that immediate steps had to be taken to halt the deterioration in the balance of payments and to prevent the development of a situation that would defeat all our hopes of economic advancement in the future.
Those measures were brought in in March and, when the March measures were deemed not sufficiently strong, we strengthened them further by the measures we brought in in July. They aimed at securing the stability which is so essential as the basis of our economic and financial programme. Time and again we made it clear that the first essential was to cut down expenditure on the import of nonessential goods. That had to be done at once and we made it clear that our immediate problem was to deal with the imbalance of international payments. Before anything else was done, that had to be done. Equally, we made it clear that the steps we took were of a temporary nature and that the remedies that were applied at that time were merely palliatives and were not of such a kind as to produce permanent solutions of our financial and economic problems. What had to be done had to be done at once and it was done. We knew that the measures then taken were unpopular and unfortunately would cause some unemployment. We had to face that, but we had to face it because we knew it was necessary in the national interest to face it, and we did it for that reason and we are very glad now to be able to say that those measures have achieved quite a degree of success.
I should give the House some particulars of the measure of success that has attended our efforts in that respect. Our troubles arose because we were bringing in too much goods and exporting too little. Deputy Lemass this morning suggested in the course of his speech that any improvement that has been effected in our balance of international payments has been due to the restrictive measures that were taken. I want to give the House and the country this encouraging intelligence—that since the 1st April this year we have an encouraging increase in our exports. I do not for a moment say that the increase in our exports is sufficient. It will require very arduous effort, on the part of our farmers particularly, and also on the part of our industrialists, to secure the further expansion of exports which is vitally necessary and essentially urgent. But at least we are entitled to take courage and encouragement from the fact that since the 1st April of this year there has been an improvement of more than £3,000,000 in our exports. That is, as I say, not enough but at least it is encouraging and is a trend in the right direction.
Exports were £1,000,000 greater in the second quarter of 1956 than in the corresponding quarter of 1955. They were also £1,000,000 up in the third quarter of 1956 over the corresponding quarter of 1955. We have just this afternoon received the November figures. Again, we are glad to say they are even still more encouraging. The November figures are £1.1 million up in this one month over the corresponding month of November last year.
That does not exhaust the whole story. It merely shows the improvement in our exports. The most recent figures for our November exports and imports show an improvement. In November, 1956, our imports were £13.8 million in value, showing a reduction of £4.7 million on the corresponding month of November last year. Exports were £10.5 million, showing an increase of £1.1 million on November, 1955. The import excess was only £3.3 million in November, 1956, thereby showing a reduction of £5.8 million over November, 1955.
Deputies and the country will recollect that the first two months of this year were very unfavourable months, but taking those bad months into account, and comparing the 11 months January to November 1956 with the same eleven months of 1955, the trade deficit shows a reduction of £18.9 million. The improvement since the end of February 1956, is £25,000,000. If we take the period from July onwards, when the Government measures were having full effect, in the five months to the end of November of this year the trade deficit had been reduced by £17.7 million compared with 1955 and by £2.5 million compared with 1954. That is something which at least gives us encouragement. It shows that the measures we had the courage to take have been successful—measures, in the taking of which and in the carrying out of which, so far from getting any help from the Opposition we got nothing but efforts to sabotage, not the interests of this Government, which do not matter, but the vital interests of the nation.
We must also bear in mind that our savings have improved—and when I say "savings" I include our bank deposits and small savings. When we take these developments into account —the growing and encouraging improvement in our adverse trade balance and the increase in our savings— we can say that they are the base on which we are entitled to plan for economic expansion which is the only permanent remedy for the economic problems of the country. We may have our credit difficulties, our high taxation and our levies in the interests of the country. These may be, and were unavoidable in the short term. However, what is vitally necessary for permanent improvement is production through savings, and that is the policy on which this Government stands and will work. It will require the co-operation of all sections of the community and every effort that can be made by every person of goodwill in every walk of life.
It may be that the working people, represented by the Labour Party, will have to exercise restraint in regard to wages, as they have in the past few months when they might have acted to the contrary. It will involve a tremendous effort by our farmers to produce more for export. It will also require a very big effort by our industrialists to produce more for export.
Deputy Lemass and his colleagues sneered at the policy for production which we produced on the 5th October of this year, because we proposed to set up councils and consultative committees. I am proud to be able to say I had a part in the setting up of those committees. We believe that this country cannot prosper without co-operation and consultation between the Government and all sections of the people. We believe the farmers will give better service, and will understand the problems that face any Government which is trying to deal with agricultural matters, if they are brought into consultation and if their advice is taken and if, above all, they are made to feel they are taking part in a great enterprise, something which is building up the nation and which is for their own good as well. That is the philosophy behind the setting up of the Agricultural Production Council and the Industrial Advisory Council—to consult the people most vitally interested, to get from the people who know the problems, who are skilled in the tasks they have to fulfil daily, advice on the way to deal with these matters and to enable them to hear from the Government, or from spokesmen on behalf of the Government, the difficulties that face a Government in dealing with the problems, and thus to find some solution of the problems that face both industry and agriculture.
If Fianna Fáil had done their job in the 18 years during which they were in office, if instead of neglecting agriculture, they had built up the agricultural industry as they now say it should be built up, if they had spent their effiorts in that direction as they did in other matters, if they had faced the fact that the economy and the finances of this country must rest on the solid basis of a prosperous and developed agricultural industry, then we would not have had to face this year or in any other year the imbalance of our international payments. But, of course, everybody knows that Deputy Lemass rode roughshod over the agricultural interests when he was there in office for 18 years. We have done our job. We can face this country knowing that we have had the hardest task any Government have had to face. We have done our duty by the country and we will continue to do it. We have had to face a hard road but we now see the light ahead and the hope of building upon what has been achieved in the past 12 months.
We have no illusions that everything is grand. We have every reason to believe that there are formidable tasks facing us—tasks that would certainly appal even the most experienced administrators with long traditions of government. We know that we have to face these tasks even now, notwithstanding all that we have done in the past but we know that we have a policy in which we believe. We have a country in which we have faith and a people who, we think, when they get the proper lead from us—as they are getting it—will respond to the efforts that are necessary to bring this country out of the condition into which it was brought by Fianna Fáil. We believe we have done a hard, and a thankless but a necessary job. We face the future not with any degree of complacency but knowing that we have even more formidable difficulties to overcome than we had before. We are going to do that job in our own time and, when we have done it and when we have had time to bring our policy into operation, we shall face the country with confidence knowing that Fianna Fáil will never disgrace these benches here again.
That is the way the Taoiseach asks for co-operation.
I have long since ceased to hope for it.
Question put.
The Dáil divided: Ta, 72; Níl, 65.
Tá
- Barrett, Stephen D.
- Barry, Anthony.
- Barry, Richard.
- Beirne, John.
- Belton, Jack.
- Blowick, Joseph.
- Burke, James J.
- Byrne, Patrick.
- Byrne, Thomas.
- Carew, John.
- Casey, Seán.
- Coburn, George.
- Collins, Seán.
- Coogan, Fintan.
- Corish, Brendan.
- Cosgrave, Liam.
- Costello, Declan.
- Costello, John A.
- Crotty, Patrick J.
- Crowe, Patrick.
- Deering, Mark.
- Desmond, Daniel.
- Dillon, James M.
- Dockrell, Henry P.
- Dockrell, Maurice E.
- Donegan, Patrick S.
- Donnellan, Michael.
- Esmonde, Anthony C.
- Everett, James.
- Fagan, Charles.
- Finlay, Thomas A.
- Flanagan, Oliver J.
- Giles, Patrick.
- Glynn, Brendan M.
- Hession, James M.
- Hughes, Joseph.
- Kenny, Henry.
- Keyes, Michael.
- Kyne, Thomas A.
- Larkin, Denis.
- Larkin, James.
- Leary, Johnny.
- Lindsay, Patrick J.
- Lynch, Thaddeus.
- McAuliffe, Patrick.
- MacEoin, Seán.
- McGilligan, Patrick.
- McMenamin, Daniel.
- Manley, Timothy.
- Morrissey, Dan.
- Mulcahy, Richard.
- Murphy, Michael P.
- Murphy, William.
- Norton, William.
- O'Connor, Kathleen.
- O'Donnell, Patrick.
- O'Donovan, John.
- O'Hara, Thomas.
- O'Higgins, Michael J.
- O'Higgins, Thomas F.
- O'Reilly, Patrick.
- O'Sullivan, Denis J.
- Palmer, Patrick W.
- Pattison, James P.
- Reynolds, Mary.
- Roddy, Joseph.
- Rooney, Eamonn.
- Sheldon, William A. W.
- Spring, Dan.
- Sweetman, Gerard.
- Tully, James.
- Tully, John.
Níl
- Aiken, Frank.
- Allen, Denis.
- Bartley, Gerald.
- Beegan, Patrick.
- Blaney, Neil T.
- Boland, Gerald.
- Brady, Seán.
- Breen, Dan.
- Brennan, Joseph.
- Brennan, Paudge.
- Breslin, Cormac.
- Briscoe, Robert.
- Burke, Patrick J.
- Calleary, Phelim A.
- Carter, Frank.
- Childers, Erskine H.
- Colbert, Michael.
- Colley, Harry.
- Collins, James J.
- Corry, Martin J.
- Crowley, Honor M.
- Crowley, Tadhg.
- Cunningham, Liam.
- Davern, Michael J.
- de Valera, Eamon.
- de Valera, Vivion.
- Egan, Kieran P.
- Egan, Nicholas.
- Fanning, John.
- O'Malley, Donough.
- Ormonde, John.
- Ryan, James.
- Ryan, Mary B.
- Flanagan, Seán.
- Flynn, John.
- Flynn, Stephen.
- Galvin, John.
- Geoghegan, John.
- Gilbride, Eugene.
- Gogan, Richard.
- Harris, Thomas.
- Hillery, Patrick J.
- Hilliard, Michael.
- Kelly, Edward.
- Kenneally, William.
- Kennedy, Michael J.
- Killilea, Mark.
- Lahiffe, Robert.
- Lemass, Noel.
- Lemass, Seán.
- Lynch, Celia.
- Lynch, Jack.
- MacCarthy, Seán.
- McEllistrim, Thomas.
- MacEntee, Seán.
- Maguire, Ben.
- Maher, Peadar.
- Medlar, Martin.
- Moher, John W.
- Mooney, Patrick.
- Moylan, Seán.
- Ó Briain, Donnchadh.
- Sheridan, Michael.
- Smith, Patrick.
- Traynor, Oscar.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies O'Sullivan and James Tully; Níl, Deputies Ó Briain and Hilliard.
Question declared carried.
The Dáil adjourned at 5 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 13th February, 1957.