I do not challenge the people's choice in electing a majority of Fianna Fáil Deputies. Neither do I challenge the people's choice of a Fianna Fáil Government. I think, however, it is only right for me to say that, after 12 months of office, I do not believe Fianna Fáil have shown they are capable of steering the ship which is the nation.
On the Vote on Account, we have an annual check-up on the state of the nation. I want to deal only with the last 12 months and, as far as I can, with the future. In my few remarks, I hope I do not have recourse to too many quotations of over 12 months ago or as far back as 25 years, not to say 36 years ago. It is no argument to say as was said by the Minister for the Gaeltacht, that the depths of the sincerity of the Opposition speeches is in the plea by the Labour Party and by Fine Gael that it is not for the Opposition to provide solutions. I do not know where Deputy Costello got that phrase but I remember it very well coming from Deputy Lemass who, from 1954 to 1957, was the leading spokesman for the Fianna Fáil Party. He said it was the duty of an Opposition to be watchful, to be careful, to criticise as toughly as they could the Government in power but that it was not for them to provide a solution for any of the difficulties that then, or that should, beset the country. If that is all right for Deputy Lemass, when in opposition, I do not think it is reasonable that we, in our annual check-up, should be abused for, in turn, criticising the behaviour of the Government for the past 12 months or for the stale policy for the next 12 months or for the absence of a policy for the next 12 months. As far as I can see, there is a notable absence of a statement of policy from the Taoiseach or from any member of the Front Bench or from any member of the back benches of the Fianna Fáil Party.
At the present time, the attitude of the people, as far as I can see, is one of despair and despondency. They are beginning to talk not alone about the futility of the Government but about the futility of Dáil Eireann. Needless to remark, I do not blame the ills of the nation on the present Government alone because, as would be the obvious answer from any member of the Front Bench of the Government Party at the moment, we are all responsible. There is no point in talking about what happened from 1951 to 1954 or from 1948 to 1951. There is no point in our being told by the Minister for Lands that Clann na Poblachta were responsible by their declarations prior to 1948 for the situation in which we find ourselves. Many different factors inside and outside the country are responsible for the present state of affairs.
We in the House are too fond of referring back to statements made either when we were in Opposition or when we were in Government. The attitude of the people is one of despair and despondency. The attitude of some people is: "What is the use?" Other people adopt the attitude: "If this country is bunched we can always go to England." I think it was Deputy Booth who said that those in Opposition should not spread the cry of despair and despondency. I will not. However, in criticising, it is difficult not to give the impression that one is trying to create an air of despair and despondency.
We in the Labour Party will, as far as we can, while being critical, try to be helpful and to make constructive speeches. It would be only right for me to say that when Fianna Fáil were in Opposition, and any time they have been in Opposition, that anti-Government feeling, that feeling of pretending that the Government of the country is bankrupt, prevailed much more than ever it did when Fianna Fáil were in office—and they, with certain sections of the Press, have to take the responsibility. They bear a shocking amount of responsibility for the despair and despondency they spread from 1954 to 1957 and from 1948 to 1951 when unemployment and emigration were not as high as they are at present. We saw cartoons in certain sections of the Press. There were photographs of men, regardless of who or what they were, waiting for the ship. Even some young girls were shown as emigrants although they were departing to enter a religious order in America or in Canada. These young girls were dubbed by this particular section of the Press as emigrants.
We have seen leading articles on the state of the country. We have heard wailing about the plight of workers, farmers, and so forth. It was only a political creation, so to speak. It was done to try to give the impression that, if there were a change of Government and if a certain Party were in power, things would be all right. Unfortunately, things are not all right. Unfortunately, in the past 12 months, there has been little indication that there will be a change. Whether or not a change is possible, we do not know. Whether or not the Fianna Fáil Government have a solution to the difficulties in which we find ourselves, I do not know. In any event, the standard of living of practically every section of the community has been worsened in the past 12 months. It has been worsened for the farmer. It has been worsened for the worker. It has been worsened for the shopkeeper. It has been worsened for the small trader. That is not criticism merely for the sake of criticism. It can be taken as a fact.
It may be said that the farmer has enjoyed a fairly prosperous time inasmuch as he had a certain price for this, that and the other. If he had a relatively high standard, it is now being brought down by the action of this Government in depressing the price of wheat and different other commodities which he produces. Despite what Deputy Dillon says, the standard of living of the worker has also been worsened. It is true that he has got compensation to the maximum of 10/- a week, which was negotiated as an agreement between the trade unions and the employers; but the fact remains that his standard of living has been worsened. Taking the average worker into consideration and having regard to the increased cost of living since he got his last increase, the average worker now suffers a loss of approximately 7/- a week. Granted he is being compensated and granted he is not as badly off in the matter of the increase in the cost of living as certain other sections are, the fact is that his standard of living has been worsened.
I regret to say this as well, the trade, at least in the provincial towns, seems to be diminishing. I am not trying to tell the Minister or the members of the Fianna Fáil Party that there is absolute destitution amongst the shopkeepers and traders, but I know that in certain publichouses in my own home town business is so bad that those publichouses are closing at six o'clock now—and if anyone wants me to produce the information I can give him the names. That is a situation we have not had for a long time. It merely bears out the point I am making, that people have not as much money to spend. Whether it is desirable that they should spend it on the bottle of stout or the half of whiskey, I cannot say, but we know it is a very important source of revenue to the Minister. In my own home town, two premises, two shops, were closed down recently. Again I do not want to exaggerate. I only say that it is a sign, it is a standard by which we can judge the difficulties under which people are suffering at the present time.
I thought it was enlightening, though somewhat frightening, to get the reply given to a question asked in the Dáil on the 12th March about butter consumption. Butter consumption by the ordinary individual has gone down. The reply was that the average consumption, as such, of creamery butter per head of the population was estimated at 29.6 lb. in 1956 and 27.2 lb. in 1957. It may not be a significant decrease, but it shows, in any case, that people cannot afford to purchase as much butter as they did heretofore. Whether that is the situation that the Government wanted or not, I do not know. On the other hand, the consumption of margarine has gone up proportionately. These are signs that the standard of living of the ordinary folk has worsened during the past 12 months.
Unemployment has not at all abated. I do not think there is much point in trying to tell us there were 8,000 more unemployed this time last year. There were, we admit that. That was caused by certain factors. It was caused by outside influences and I might say it was caused by certain actions—this is my opinion—that the Government had to take in order to correct the balance of payments problem, by the imposition of the special import levies— which, as everybody knew and as was the declared intention, were to be temporary. On the other hand, I do not think there is any evidence that emigration has declined at all over the past 12 months. I suppose it was not unusual—it was not an innovation last year, it happened in previous years— to see whole families leaving the towns and the rural parts of the country. It is tragic, pathetic; and I do not blame the Fianna Fáil Government for that over the last 12 months. Every one of us here in Dáil Éireann who was ever part of the Government must take his share of responsibility for that.
Employment has been reduced and that fact makes a laugh of any boast which any member of the Front Bench of the Government might make about the decrease of 8,000 in unemployment figures compared to this time last year. The fact is that there are 24,000 less in agricultural and industrial employment than there were this time last year. I have heard speakers from the Fianna Fáil Benches, in these last two or three days of the Dáil session, who did not attempt to explain these figures. Therefore, I assume they are accepted. There are 8,000 fewer unemployed, but there are 24,000 fewer in agricultural and industrial employment. That does not seem to suggest that any of the plans Fianna Fáil made over the past 12 months were designed to increase employment. The fact is— and all of us have to face up to it— that unemployment is on the increase and emigration has not abated.
The Taoiseach—and this is one of the few quotations I will make in this debate—when he spoke on the 4th July last, referred to employment given by local authorities. As reported at column 818, he said:
"The Minister for Local Government, who is sitting beside me, is engaged, as Deputies in the House will know, in trying to stimulate activity in building houses, in road building and in other local authority services."
Now, everybody knows there is far less employment on house building and on roads than there was this time last year. The Minister for Local Government says he had to repay the debts we incurred in 1956. This is an excuse which invariably comes up for Ministers for Local Government in the different Fianna Fáil Governments. The fact, as far as road workers are concerned, is that in 1957 on the 31st January there were 15,650 road workers and that number diminished to 14,365 in 1958.
It does not seem as if the Minister for Local Government, despite the exhortations of the Taoiseach, was very active in the matter of providing road work through local authorities. The figures undoubtedly show there was far less employment on roads. We have the spectacle in my own county, at least, of men with 30 or 35 years' service being laid off now. I know it is for the tail-end of the financial year, but it is something which never happened before. I know the spring of 1957 was very hard on them, but it is worse this year, despite the fact that Fianna Fáil promised they would get people back to work and, as one of the posters said, they would "get cracking". Deputy Smith, who was Minister for Local Government on 4th July, did not seem to heed what the Taoiseach said to him in regard to house building, because there are far fewer engaged in house building now. This time last year, or at least on 31st January, 1957, 4,580 were employed by local authorities on house building. In January of this year, that had fallen to 2,604, a difference of practically 2,000.
Again, we took some hope from another statement of the Taoiseach, who said, on the Estimate for his Department, on 4th July last, as reported at column 824:—
"We are now on the point of adjourning and, in the time which will elapse between now and the reassembly of the Dáil, the members of the Government will devote themselves to the task of doing everything possible in their Departments to promote greater activity and to enable more production to be secured from industry and from agriculture, with consequential greater employment. We have not had many months so far to deal with the task of correcting the position as a whole and trying to bring the State out of the position in which it was when we took office. The steps that have been taken so far have already produced results. We believe that the steps that will be taken between now and the reassembly of the Dáil will have the result of reducing unemployment, reducing the economic pressure which makes for emigration and will in general bring the nation back into the position in which the old confidence will reassert itself. These steps must of necessity, be administrative."
I do not think the Taoiseach was very successful since 4th July. He led us to believe that, from 4th July up to the resumption of the Dáil, different plans would be formulated for increasing production and for increasing employment. That did not happen. We have not seen any legislation since 4th July that would promote more employment and we have seen no encouraging signs. As one of the other Deputies said, the main talk seems to be on the possibility of our having to enter the Free Trade Area.
Every time anybody on this side of the House mentions the Irish language, we are supposed to be sneering at it. In my opinion, all these references to the language and to the Free Trade Area, at certain functions, are a type of red herring. I am, always have been, and I hope always will be in favour of the revival of the Irish language, but because my view as to how it should be revived differs from the view of the Taoiseach, it does not suggest that I am anti-Irish or sneering at the language. If we are to get this sort of red herring thrown across the trail any time we talk about the Irish language, then it is time we all folded up.
Undoubtedly, there is a colossal problem to be faced as far as unemployment is concerned, especially in the rural areas. I know that the problem in the City of Dublin is of tremendous proportions, but, leaving Dublin aside, it seems to me that the bulk, and the vast bulk, is in the rural areas. According to the industrial analysis from mid-February, 1958, there was a total of 60,000 people unemployed who ordinarily would be employed in building in the rural areas, on roads and different construction work, in farming and forestry. Therefore, it seems that if we are to alleviate unemployment to any large extent, we will have to devote a great deal of our energy to the problem in the rural areas.
It is true that the cost of living has increased—nobody can deny that. According to the consumer price index, the cost of living has increased by nine points since this Government took office. That means an approximate increase of 7 per cent. and therefore I do not think anybody can deny that the standard of living of the main sections of the people has been worsened to a very large extent. While I know that some of the increase may be attributed to outside influences, I think it would be right to say as well that the major portion of the increase is the direct responsibility of the Government through the Budget which they introduced in May of last year.
Having said all that, and endeavouring in brief to show what, in my opinion, is the condition of the different sections of the community, I want to say that the Government are not entirely to blame, but they must take the major share of responsibility, as we were expected to do and did take the major share of responsibility for our term of office from 1954 to 1957. Outside influences have been against this Government as they have been against Governments since the establishment of this House 36 or 37 years ago. One of the things that, in my opinion, affects the economy of this country, and consequently affects the lives of the ordinary people, whether workers, farmers, industrialists or businessmen, is the price of money. The tragic thing about Governments in this country and the tragic thing about this House—and I might say the futility of Governments here and of this House— is the fact that whilst we can control the price of bread, farm machinery, cigarettes, or any commodity you care to mention, the one important thing which we cannot control is the price of money.
Whilst none of us—and I speak about Parties, not individuals—seems to have any solution for this money problem, the fact is that if the bankers in England, or the British Government, say that money is to go up by 2 per cent., we have got to follow. If they say that money is to go down by 2 per cent., we naturally follow, willy-nilly. Mind you, the bank rate in Britain has increased, or fluctuated, over the past ten to 15 years to correct a situation that is entirely different from the situation that we have experienced in this country over the past ten to 15 years. The Bank of England and the British Government wanted to correct a certain situation, where, in fact, they had too much employment, where they had inflation. We had an entirely different and opposite situation and to correct their situation in Britain, the bank rate went up by 1 or 1½ per cent. and we had to follow.
We had mass unemployment and tens of thousands of emigrants going from this country. We had to make money scarce by following the British and increasing the bank rate, which meant that we could not build houses to the extent to which we wanted to build them and could not engage in any type of capital expenditure. Agricultural expansion and industrial expansion were limited. The fact that the price of money went up meant that houses were dearer and made it difficult for people to pay the rents for them, and even made it difficult for them to accept houses offered to them. In short, it created unemployment and the fact remains that as long as our money system is attached to that of the British, and unless we can get some definite arrangement whereby we can manipulate the price of money to suit ourselves, we will have this unemployment and depression which many of us have spoken about over the past ten to 15 years.
As I say, we cannot control the price of money. We can control the price of practically everything else. Whilst money was scarce, whilst we could not expand industry or agriculture, the tragic fact is that the bankers' profits increased in 1956 and 1957. The Minister for the Gaeltacht seemed to sneer at one of the remarks of Deputy Costello who said that the Suez crisis had created unemployment. It did, of course, create unemployment. It was not the major factor, but it contributed substantially to it, and the Minister for the Gaeltacht ought to know that better than anyone else. The Korean War also affected employment. The beginning of that war in 1950 affected this and practically every other country in the world. Many of the countries were geared for war and we all know the effects that war has on every country. Suez was the same. Britain, France and America were ready to engage in a major war and the Minister for the Gaeltacht says that that was just poppycock, as if it were just a game of marbles to be played in the Middle East.
As the Korean war and the Suez crisis affected us, so, too, will the Free Trade Area have a terrific effect on us. In Paris to-day, somebody expressed the opinion that free trade would never come and I am inclined to doubt whether it will ever come, but one thing is certain, that is, if free trade is to come to this country, we here will not have the slightest say in it. I appreciate what the Minister for Industry and Commerce was doing at these conferences in Paris. His being there ensures that the Irish view is put, and, if he were to travel over there every second week, he would be doing a good job. Without any disrespect to the person of the Minister for Agriculture, I would far rather that the Minister for Industry and Commerce represented Ireland at these talks than the Minister for Agriculture.
This Free Trade Area will mean the ending of many of the industries in this country. Unfortunately, it will do that. The pattern for the establishment of industries in this country is one of protection all the time, and I have no objection to it. Can any Deputy say, in respect of any body of businessmen whom he brought to the Department of Industry and Commerce regarding the establishment of an industry, that the first question they did not ask the officials of that Department was: "What protection are we going to get?" How many of the industries established in this country over the past 20 years were established by promoters who said to the Minister and to the departmental officials: "We do not want any protection; we are prepared to compete with every other factory that makes the same articles as we do, whether it be inside or outside Ireland"? What the process is going to be with regard to entry into the Free Trade Area I do not know—whether it is going to be a gradual process or not—but, if this Free Trade Area is to come into being by a certain date, it will mean ruin for many of the industries in this country, and will mean unemployment in a lot of other industries affected.
I cannot understand one thing and I addressed a question on this matter to the Minister for Industry and Commerce last week. Why does the Government not engage now in a colossal campaign asking people to buy Irish manufactured goods? All of us know that even at the present time there is a tremendous prejudice, a stupid and ignorant prejudice, amongst certain sections of the community against Irish-made articles. It may be true that many may be defective. They may have their faults and the price may not be right, but how many appreciate that these articles and goods are made by Irish workers, that they are keeping Irish workers in employment and that, apart from those considerations, the Irish made product is as good as, if not better than, the imported product?
We have that prejudice not only amongst the consumers, but amongst those who sell. I bet that every Deputy has had the experience of going into a shop to buy a suit length, some time or other during the past ten years or so. He has looked over and casually fingered cloth and then, because he does not appear to be satisfied, the shop assistant will say: "I have a lovely bit of British stuff here," and out is trotted the British suit length which certain of the shop assistants sell in preference to the Irish-made article.
On the other hand, we are inclined to be very parochial in our outlook, as far as buying Irish is concerned. In certain areas in the west, they do not manufacture shoes, and when many of the people in those areas enter a shop, they are not particular whether they buy American, French or British shoes. However, if there were a shoe factory in their own town, they would be very careful then to buy the Irish-made article. Some of them forget that, by buying these Irish-made shoes or boots, they are keeping Irishmen in employment in Kilkenny, Dublin, Cork, Cavan and hosts of other places. For that reason, I think the Government should engage in a big campaign to encourage people to buy Irish goods, because, if and when this free trade business comes along, it will mean there will be a flood of British, German- and French-manufactured articles that will be sought and bought up by certain people in this country who have a prejudice against anything made in Ireland.
I have already said that many of the difficulties are not of the Government's making, but we have got to realise that we cannot remain aloof from the effect of wars, or any conflicts, major or minor, that go on in the world. We cannot shut our eyes to the fact that the whole economy of the country can be affected by a fluctuation in the bank rate over which we have no control, and we should appreciate that, if we have to enter the Free Trade Area, it will have a tremendous effect on the country's economy. In respect of the Free Trade Area, I might say it will not be our decision whether we enter it or not. It must be recognised that if Britain decides to go into the Free Trade Area, we have got to follow her because 90 per cent. of our business and trade is done with Britain. For that reason alone, whatever Britain decides, I am afraid we will automatically have to follow.
The point I want to stress is that we should not attempt to make political capital out of any difficulties that might arise from abroad, from outside sources. Fianna Fáil, when in opposition, made political capital out of certain difficulties that were not of our making, that arose out of the Suez situation, and further back, in 1950, that arose out of the Korean situation. I do not think we should do that, and if there is some outside event which affects the policy of this Government, we should not make political capital of anything which might flow from it. As far as policies in regard to external and international affairs are concerned, I think we, of the Labour Party, should always be behind the Government.
At the present time, we have some control over the balance of payments problem. At least, we can take certain action to rectify it. When free trade comes, it will increase our difficulties and our problems will be bigger. In those circumstances, I do not know of any Government action that can be taken to correct a balance of payments problem. There was a tremendous balance of payments problem in 1956 and one of the things which contributed to that was the fact that the price of cattle dropped very much. Speakers from the Fianna Fáil side of the House tried to represent in some way or another that the former Minister for Agriculture was responsible for the drop in the price of cattle. I cannot understand that. The Minister for Agriculture does not determine the price of cattle.
