Probably when account is taken of the subventions provided for social assistance recipients, the total would amount to £9 million, as Deputy Dillon mentions. Therefore, the total demand which the community has to bear, allowing for the reduction in the food subsidies and the increase in the Book of Estimates, is a sum not less than £20 million greater than it was three years ago. At the same time the country is still faced with the serious problem of continued emigration, the large number still on the unemployment register, and with the various other problems to which the Taoiseach referred in the course of his speech.
I wonder has the Government ever considered to what extent they are the victims of their own policies. Yesterday the trade returns published in the newspapers indicated that, although exports in some cases were lower than in the previous year, in the main the balance of trade was favourable, that although the volume was up, the cost of imports was lower than in the previous year, that in fact over the last three years the import price level has tended downward all the time. It is true, as the Taoiseach has said, that since 1948, after a substantial rise in the cost of living between 1957 and 1958, up to recently the price level was stable. However, it seems to me we have now got into a domestic price inflation situation and if one is to take the forecast of the Taoiseach about agricultural prices for certain commodities in the near future, that price level is not yet exhausted.
Quite recently there was a rise in the price of bread, attributable to the last round of wage increases granted to bakery workers. In addition there has been a recent rise in bus fares, and now, according to what the Taoiseach has said, it is proposed in the near future to make some change in the prices paid for certain agricultural products. It is reasonable to assume that one of these products will be milk, which will affect butter as a product manufactured from milk. That in turn will press hard on the people who have already been affected by the increase in the price of bread and the increase in bus fares.
It is appropriate that we should examine the Book of Estimates, as Deputy Russell mentioned, to see where changes can be made or what reductions can be effected. Shortly after the Government were elected, the Minister for Finance announced in the course of the Budget Statement that it was proposed to carry out an exhaustive examination into the administration and cost of the Civil Service machine. Nothing has been heard since of that examination or of the results of it. The Minister made a passing reference, on one subsequent occasion, to the fact that the matter was under consideration or that certain action had been taken, but nothing has been achieved so far.
I agree with the remark of the Taoiseach that if wage or arbitration tribunals grant increases they should be accepted and that public servants, whether Civil Servants, Gardaí, Army personnel or teachers, should be adequately remunerated. But I am quite satisfied that the present position of the national economy does not justify the expenditure on the face of the Book of Estimates of £123,000,000 for the lowest population in our history.
There is something wrong in our approach to economic problems if we spend ever-increasing sums to administer the same, or a variation, of public services in a falling or static population. It is time that the cost, as well as the contribution, made by State and semi-State bodies to the community was examined in a realistic manner. On many occasions, justifiable tributes have been paid to the success of State undertakings but when tributes are paid, care is always taken to refer to the successful undertakings and no one ever refers to the unsuccessful ones or to the ones which continue to be a cost on the community or the Exchequer.
In that regard, everyone is a contributor. Everyone has to pay more in taxation to keep these undertakings going or to pay higher prices for commodities or for services rendered. Some of these bodies are providing services which must be made available to the community. On the other hand, some of them are rendering services which are described as being necessary for national prestige. The best national prestige we could have is an improvement in our all-round standard of living and a general improvement in the national economy. It is, I believe, the responsibility of the Government and of the House carefully to examine the cost of these undertakings and carefully to scrutinise, either at the behest of the Minister for Finance or the Government as a whole, the relationship between the cost and the services rendered by these State bodies.
It is hardly appropriate, in a debate such as this, to specify which bodies should be examined, but the responsible Ministers have a duty and the Government have a responsibility to examine the cost of these bodies and the services rendered by them in order not only to see that the community is getting adequate value for the money spent, but that the services and the work done are essential to the national welfare.
During this debate, and on many other occasions, talk has centred on the need for greater efficiency in agricultural and industrial production and a great deal of attention has been paid to possible changes in European trading conditions. I must say that the talk which Ministers of different Governments often are obliged to indulge in at meetings or functions organised by trade or other bodies seems to me to miss the point. People generally—and it is characteristic of human nature, whether the people are directors or managers of concerns or those employed in them—do not respond to exhortations to produce more efficiently or to work harder. Most people are obliged to work at a certain level and, in the main, the greater bulk of those engaged in industry or agriculture work as hard as they can. There are only two incentives which will urge people to greater effort. One is the possibility of greater reward and the other is the fear of competition. Other incentives lack reality and however we may urge people to produce more efficiently or more cheaply or to work harder, the incentives which will bring the greatest results are the prospects of a greater reward or the fear of competition.
So far as the first is concerned, we have some control over it here. The present level of taxation is agreed by economists to be too high and, judging from what the Taoiseach has just said, the prospect of any reduction in the immediate future is unlikely. I want to get the Government to consider the recommendation which was made in the first report of the Capital Investment Advisory Committee. They recommended that the question of changing the method of application of the agricultural grant should be considered. That report was presented to the previous Government just before the election and, while certain action was taken by the present Government, that recommendation was not acted upon.
If what the Taoiseach has said is applied in respect of certain agricultural commodities, while it may act as an incentive to the producer and may lead to greater output, it will have repercussions on the domestic price structure and will impinge on the very sections of the community whose position has already been worsened by the recent increases in the price of bread and higher bus fares. Those are the people living on fixed incomes, whether pensioners of one sort or another or people living on fixed salaries. If the situation has worsened for the poorer sections of the community, it seems to me that we are faced with the problem of trying to relieve the economic difficulties of the farmers, which have increased over the past few years and, on the other hand, of maintaining a price structure which will leave these commodities within the purchasing power of the poorer sections of the community and which also will not result in a further demand for wage increases.
It is true that price changes over the past 12 months have been entirely due to the domestic economic situation. Whether these price changes are brought about by wage increases or by direct Government action, the result is that there are increases in the price of foodstuffs and in the price of services and it is more difficult, because of these increases, for the weaker sections of the community to exist on the same pensions.
I believe that the present enormous burden of State expenditure and the expenditure by semi-State bodies has the effect of diminishing initiative. The economists who have considered this, no matter from what section of the community they were drawn, have repeatedly expressed the view that a lowering of taxation would provide the greatest possible incentive towards increased economic expansion and towards the realisation of the aim of getting increased exports.
We all share the aim and objective of trying to provide greater employment and of endeavouring to reduce emigration by providing jobs at home for those who at present seek work elsewhere but I was struck by a lecture which an economist delivered last year. In the course of that lecture he said that it would be possible to maintain a higher standard of living and at the same time have 200,000 fewer persons employed in agriculture than are employed at the present time. When you see that figure expressed in the form that he put it, you are struck by the size of the numbers, but if you look at the numbers who have left rural employment, agricultural employment, over a number of years, there is nothing very fantastic about it.
He does not mean that they will go in a year or two years but over a period, because of the interchange between this country and Britain and because of the influences which affect people. As a great many people here will inevitably tend to seek employment in Britain, where they can get higher wages and the higher standards to which they aspire, it is certain they will leave employment in agriculture. Whether they are small farmers or agricultural workers they will go to places either in Britain or elsewhere and get what appears to be a higher standard from the monetary point of view.
But when that fact is pointed out, as it was on that occasion by this person who was, as I said to him afterwards, free to say things that politicians might not say—free to express a viewpoint in a way in which others might realise that what he was saying was a very likely possibility and indeed a very likely result—it imposed on the community as a whole the problem of providing some means of inducing these people to remain here and of providing employment for them. One of the satisfactory results of the last few years, and indeed of last year, was the growth in industrial exports but it only matched—and in fact did not quite match—the drop in agricultural exports. No matter how one examines the economy for the past year, it seems that it was static, if not declining. The drop in the number of cattle exported was attributed in so far as I understood it, to two factors. One was the drought in Britain and the drought here which had an effect on the number of cattle which were in a suitable condition for sale, and the other was the effect of the bovine tuberculosis eradication scheme.
On that subject I want to say that the problem of eradicating bovine tuberculosis is a national one which depends for its success on the efforts, not only of the officers and officials of the Department of Agriculture but of the farming community as a whole. Rightly or wrongly there is an impression that all is not well with the methods which have been adopted, that the progress of that scheme is not nearly as rapid or as satisfactory as it should be and an incorrect impression is being created in Britain. All of that has militated against sales here and has had a depressing effect on the price of cattle for a considerable time. I feel that we should if necessary enter into consultations, in conjunction with the trade agreement, with the British authorities to see if there are any steps which we can take, or any changes which we can make in the methods of dealing with this problem which would, on the one hand, speed up the eradication of the disease and at the same time erase the suspicion that the system in operation here is not appropriate or adequate to deal with the problem.
As far as one can gather, the method employed, the technical application of the scheme, is as efficient as in any country in the world. The fact that we embarked on the scheme late and that many other countries had many years' start on us has, of course, aggravated the difficulties involved. No matter what the difficulties are, no matter what are the problems involved for those directly concerned, I believe that we should seek to erase from everybody's mind any suspicion that we are not wholeheartedly engaged in the struggle to eradicate this disease and show that we are prepared to take any and every step to eradicate it as quickly and as efficiently as possible.
During this debate, reference was made to the proposed changes in trade in Europe and the trade discussions with Britain. I do not accept that the present trading arrangement with continental countries is just as simple as the Taoiseach mentioned. I believe that on a number of occasions—and certainly one specific instance which comes immediately to mind is the lamb trade with France—we did not get the reciprocal rights under the agreement which we should have got and that in that particular instance administrative and other barriers were placed in the way. In so far as these trade agreements are generally concerned, in some cases administrative procedures were applied which created difficulties. Remember it is one thing when Governments are trading with one another; it is another thing when individual traders or groups of traders are trading directly with their counterparts in other countries and people are distracted if they find administrative and other difficulties placed in their way.
For that reason there is something wrong with a trading situation in which, so far as I understand it, last year we bought over £33,000,000 worth of goods from a number of European countries while they bought about £7,000,000 worth from us. There is something wrong with that balance of trade that requires examination. Many of the agreements have been in existence — some were probably negotiated in the early days and, in the main, they have tended to be renegotiated on the same basis—for nearly a decade. They were originally negotiated shortly after the end of the war, when trading conditions were difficult. On the other hand, it is not sufficient to say, as was said in reply to a Parliamentary Question, that the matter is under constant examination and review. That is a favourite device for giving the impression that something is happening, whereas, in fact, nothing may be happening.
In connection with the trade discussions with Britain, we have no desire to embarrass the Government, or to express views which would in any way create difficulties, or make the situation in any way more complicated than it is. These discussions have been continuing for a very considerable time. So far as I recollect, negotiations started last July. They were suspended during the British general election and restarted early this year. In view of the present very unsatisfactory level of prices for agricultural products, particularly cattle prices, it is reasonable to expect that the agreement, or whatever changes are made, will be concluded in time for normal trading to be continued during the course of the present year.
We have had two very difficult years from the point of view of weather. It is significant that the Taoiseach, in the course of a speech last weekend, referred to our trade with the British as the keystone of the arch. As I say, while recognising and sympathising with the problems of the Government, we are entitled, I believe, to expect that these discussions will be carried on and concluded as speedily as possible in order that both agricultural and industrial interests may be aware of the prospects before them on a definite basis.
This Book of Estimates provides a sum of £½ million extra for grants to health authorities. That, I assume, is on the basis of the existing £ for £ scheme which has operated for a great number of years, in fact since the Health Act was introduced. It is the universal experience of Deputies that the present health scheme is unsatisfactory. Whether that is because of administration, or because of the fact that it is two-tiered—partly the business of the local authorities and partly that of the Government—or whether it is because the system is an extension of the old dispensary system, is difficult to say. No matter to which part of the country one goes, whether to a rural or an urban area, one is approached by a number of individuals with complaints about not getting benefits to which they are entitled, or with complaints that others have got benefits in similar circumstances. It is impossible, in all cases, to know the actual facts.
I believe the time has come when we should have a re-examination of the whole system of health administration. The present system is not providing benefits, in many cases, for the most needy, and is certainly not providing benefits in any way commensurate with the cost of the scheme. Reference has been made to the very serious difficulties of old age pensioners, and others. These difficulties have, if anything, been aggravated, because the weaker sections are always hit first and hit hardest by any change in price levels. There were recent changes in the price of bread and in bus fares and, while many old age pensioners do not travel very far, nevertheless, they are greatly affected. In addition, I understand there is likely to be a further increase in the price of bread in the near future which will impinge very heavily on the recipients of old age pensions and social welfare benefits. In the main, the recipients of these benefits are old people or sick people.
The administration of the health scheme, as I have said, requires to be examined with a view to providing as far as possible for those who are in need, and to eliminate, where necessary, either those who are in receipt of benefits and should not be, or unnecessary administration costs and expenditure.
The total of this Book of Estimates is staggering. It is a very sombre thought that it is approximately £20,000,000 more when account is taken of the food subsidies and increases within the past three years, at a time when the economic outlook is as was portrayed by the Taoiseach this morning in the indications he gave of growing competition in foreign markets, and more serious difficulties at home in respect of prices of commodities to all sections of the community.
In these circumstances, it is reasonable to ask: what efforts have the Government made during the past three years to carry out the undertakings they gave after assuming office, that they were carrying out a radical examination of the whole cost and structure of State administration, with a view to providing a type of administration, or scheme, which would cost less and provide more efficiently for the needs of the community? I believe nothing has happened in that regard, that the Government have not implemented their undertakings and that, in fact, during the past three years—and particularly during the past 12 months— our economy has declined. The economic prospects of the nation are by no means as attractive or as rosy as some Government spokesmen paint them.
Listening to the Taoiseach this morning, I thought the views expressed by him were not only pessimistic but that the economic outlook for the country and the community as a whole was by no means attractive. I believe if we examine carefully the headings I have mentioned, and if care is taken to explain the situation to the interests concerned, farmers, industrialists and trade unions, we shall find all sections of the community prepared and anxious to play their part. It should be put to them that the battle for economic survival, the battle for economic improvement, needs a combined effort by all sections, but if the effects of wage increases are passed on to certain sections in order to compensate for the increases granted, in effect we shall have a domestic price inflation.
So far as one can deduce from the figures published, that is the situation this country is facing at the moment, and it is a very serious situation. If we realise that, at the same time, we have had the advantage for the past three years of favourable import prices, and favourable circumstances generally from the point of view of trading, and if in those circumstances we find the economy mainly stagnant, it is time to ask what efforts and what changes have the Government made in the administration of the State, and what changes have they in mind, in the economy as well as in the structure. Unless some changes are made, fewer and fewer people will be obliged to carry a greater burden. We shall find that we are in a circle which gets more and more difficult with heavier demands being made on all sections of the community and with fewer people to bear a growing burden as time goes on.
