I move:
"That in view of the insecurity of employment at the Arigna mines and the failure of private enterprise to fully develop them and so provide a stable industry, Dáil Éireann is of opinion that steps should be taken by the Government for the fullest utilisation of the resources of these mines under the auspices of Bord na Móna or of a separate semi-State body."
The motion is self-explanatory and is one that should meet with the approval of the majority of the members of this House. There is not the slightest doubt that there are tremendous resources in the Arigna area in coal deposits and other minerals. The tragic fact is that since we achieved political freedom in 26 of our counties no effort whatever has been made to develop these natural resources and thereby give first-class employment and provide further fuel requirements from home resources.
I am glad to note that in recent weeks the Minister who is responsible for fuel has announced that investigations are being made at the moment into the possibility of using the large deposits of what is known as crow coal in the Arigna area. However late that development, it is one that we all welcome. It is regrettable that we have had to wait 40 years before an attempt on these lines was made.
This same Minister, who made a pronouncement in the last two days in this connection, sought to suggest to the public that great efforts were being made in the country generally with regard to the utilisation of native fuel with particular reference to coal deposits, that the output had increased in a number of mines and that the number of people employed had increased.
It is only fair that we should have the views of an expert on that statement of the Minister for Transport and Power. I should like to quote statements made by Mr. Murrough O'Brien, Director of the Geological Survey of Ireland, a man who is an expert in that field, who knows his job, who is qualified to talk on it accurately and who has no political axe to grind. In 1958, in the course of an interview with the editor of the magazine Development, he was asked for his views on mineral deposits in Ireland in general. One of the questions he was asked was in connection with the increase of the output from our mines in comparison with the increase that has taken place in other countries similarly placed. The other countries mentioned in the question— I hope the House notes this — are Portugal, Morocco, South Korea and the territories formerly known as Indo-China. Those countries, according to Mr. O'Brien, are the only four in the world with more anthracite than soft coal. They are in the same position as Ireland in that regard. He says these countries are finding ways and means of using their coal in industry.
For example, in South Korea coal output has jumped at the rate of 20 per cent. per annum. Taking the four countries together, the annual average increase of coal output was estimated at 12 per cent. That may not be a big increase to people like the Minister, who thinks of jet planes and such things, but we must remember that those countries can be genuinely described as poor and under-developed, lacking the knowhow and experience.
He was asked how that increase in the four countries compared with the increase in production here. This is the expert talking: "Not so favourably for us. Our output is going up at barely half those rates and has returned to figures not greatly in excess of our early 19th century production." That is the opinion of a man who is in charge of the Geological Office. There is no doubt whatever that as a nation we have not faced up to the problem involved in applying new techniques to the development and expansion of the coal industry.
Mr. O'Brien said in the same interview that Ireland's mineral resources were, in the middle of the last century, worked very fully according to the means available at that time but that, for all practical purposes, since the introduction of new techniques in other countries we have made little or no effort to take advantage of them in order to increase output from our coal mines. The Minister may say he does not agree with the remarks of that individual but if he has other figures or information which contradict the view of that expert I think he should put them before the House.
We have blamed our next door neighbour, a nation known as our ancient enemy, for many of the ills that beset us over the years. How can we blame them for the negligence that we have shown in the development of our native industry, particularly our coal mining industry, since native Government was established here. The undeveloped area to which I referred in this motion extends into three counties — Sligo, Leitrim and north Roscommon—and I suppose the fact that it does extend into three counties has led to the position where it was not the responsibility of any Government, where it was nobody's baby. However, let us hope that a new day has dawned for that area. In case any member of the House does not believe there has been considerable neglect of the area over the years, I want to put on record the written evidence over the past ten years with regard to the Arigna area and the position there since 1950.
I cannot go back much further unless I refer briefly to 1948 when I was elected to the House for the first time. In that year, Deputy Mrs. Reynolds asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether he was aware that a great amount of uneasiness existed in Sligo, Leitrim and north Roscommon because of the closing down of many coal mines and the reduction of the number of people employed in a number of others. The then Minister, Deputy Morrissey, said the problem of the disposal of coal output in the areas was under examination by the Department and at that time their officials were undertaking a local investigation. That answer was given again in 1949 and in 1950 and has been repeated each year for the past 12 years.
On March 9th, 1950, I asked a question of the Minister for industry and Commerce on the same lines and Deputy Morrissey replied that he had received representations on behalf of some of the owners in the Arigna area to the effect that they were finding it difficult to dispose of their output. Again in 1950 there was another question, this time by Deputy Hickey from Cork, in which he asked a number of questions about the coal mining industry in Slieveardagh, Arigna and Castlecomer. The reply of the Minister was that the mines were in private ownership and that he could not do anything about it. The situation got so bad that I asked a question at the end of 1950 as to the possibility of setting up a generating station in Arigna to appropriate the coal output and Deputy Cosgrave replied that the Electricity Supply Board had considered the matter. That was away back in 1950.
In 1951 there were more queries, followed by still more queries in 1952. In 1952 the Minister was back again on the position in Arigna; he stated that the purchase and sale of Arigna coal was a commercial matter best dealt with by direct contact with the interests involved. He disclaimed responsibility for finding a market; he disclaimed any responsibility for ensuring security of employment for the workers there. He stated it was a matter for the companies concerned to get a market, if they could; he was under no responsibility, as Minister for Industry and Commerce, for ensuring that a market was got.
In 1953 the Minister was questioned once more on the question of coal generally by Deputy O.J. Flanagan. The Minister replied that the marketing of the output of the producers "is not one of my functions." He said that, in the belief that a solution for this marketing problem could be found by the combined efforts of the producers and distributors, meetings between them had been arranged through the instrumentality of his Department: "I am satisfied," he said, "that only in this way can a satisfactory solution be found." That was in 1953, and we are still awaiting the solution of the problem of the development of the Arigna Mines and the sale of the coal from those mines.
Again, in December, 1953, Deputy Gilbride asked the Minister a question with regard to employment in the Arigna Colliery. The Minister pointed out that, in recent years, the Sugar Company had been buying Arigna coal and he understood they were prepared to continue purchasing Arigna coal provided the price, etc., was suitable. He went on to say that, if it was a fact that some of the Arigna workings coal could not be produced for sale at an economic price, it was for the interests concerned to consider what reorganisation or other changes might be required to rectify the situation. These people were sent from Billy to Jack with regard to the sale of their coal and with regard to the necessary capital and everything else, to finance their development.
I do not wish to delay the House with too many quotations but I should like to refer to one question in 1954 when Deputy J. Lynch was Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister. I asked him in 1954 what steps he was going to take to ensure that the welfare of the workers would be safeguarded. He told me the Minister was making every effort to encourage State-sponsored companies to use the coal but, at the same time, he could not advance the interests of one mining company as against the other. At that stage it was beginning to dawn on the Government that it was essential that they should accept responsibility for the sale of Arigna coal.
On 3rd March last the question again arose here. There was no market for the coal produced and a number of the miners were laid off. The Government was asked to take some action to put the industry on its feet. I pointed out to the Minister on 3rd March that a number of colliery workers had been laid off and others were likely to be laid off; a number of men had left the locality and gone to England over the years because of lack of employment. The Minister gave what was, in my opinion, a completely inaccurate reply. There were three points: first, preference was given by State and semi-State bodies to the purchase of coal from Arigna; secondly, there was no drop in employment; and, thirdly, most of the coal produced in Arigna was absorbed in the power station.
With regard to the first point, a number of State and so-called semi-State bodies had undoubtedly taken a certain percentage of Arigna coal, but these companies had to be kept under pressure before they would live up to their responsibilities in this regard. In 1958 one company — some may not regard it as a State or semi-State sponsored body, but I believe it is — ceased to take Arigna coal. I refer to Cement Limited. In December, 1958, one of the suppliers of coal to Cement Limited received a communication from that company announcing that as from 1st January no more Arigna coal would be needed. That was a bombshell.
As a result of that communication a number of men were laid off as from 1st January. The reason Cement Limited no longer required Arigna coal in 1958 was that the National Coal Board in Britain had decided to make coal available at a reduced price. As a result of that decision an Irish Company decided to close down a mine in Arigna; they were going to take subsidised British coal. That should not be allowed in any civilised community. First of all, the notice was insufficient. Permitting subsidised British coal to throw Irish miners out of employment is something no Government should tolerate and the Government at the time should have taken steps to ensure Irish workers were protected and that this industry, which was just getting on its feet, was protected to such an extent as would keep them in business.
I do not think anybody here will suggest that the E.S.B. is not a State-sponsored company. In 1958 the E.S.B. refused to take coal from a number of producers in Arigna. Again, the significant feature was that that was the time when the National Coal Board made the glad announcement of a substantial reduction in the price of coal. The E.S.B., a State company, took advantage of this to the detriment of a native industry. A number of us, at that stage, met responsible officials of the Department and emphasised to them the necessity of urging that the E.S.B. be directed to continue taking supplies from Arigna. The E.S.B. very nicely agreed that they were prepared to take supplies of a certain amount of Arigna coal if the price was right.
One of the figures quoted was £4 6s. a ton delivered to Ringsend. When one realises that the price of coal delivered into the station near Arigna itself was in the region of £3 14s. a ton, that left only 16/- a ton more for the coal to be delivered at Ringsend. It was an impossibility at that price for any producer in Arigna to supply the requirements of the E.S.B. and, as a result, the E.S.B. can say that they were prepared to take the coal. The Sugar Company, the E.S.B. and Cement Limited have ensured that they will cash in on the cheap, subsidised British coal and to hell with the producer in Arigna, as far as they are concerned.
In 1960, after more pressure had been brought to bear, the private secretary of the present Minister sent a letter to the producers in the Arigna area in which he stated that the Minister was aware, from other inquiries which he had made, that at least one big undertaking in the country was willing to purchase native coal in quantity at prices related to import prices. Imagine that announcement coming from this gentleman who pretends he has an interest in the Arigna mines. When his private secretary was writing that letter, the Minister knew that the coal available at the pit-head in Britain was subsidised to the tune of 35/- a ton. How could the producers in Arigna compete with such a product coming into the country? It was an absolute impossibility.
The position at that time was, and is at the moment, that coal produced in Wales was imported here to the Twenty-Six Counties and it was found a profitable business to re-export to the Six Counties. People were making money re-exporting British coal to the Six Counties. While all this was going on, the fathers of families, the breadwinners of the Arigna area, were leaving the country week after week to work in the British coal mines because the Government considered they were not in a position to compete against the subsidised product coming in from abroad. So much for the preference the Minister said he was giving to Arigna coal.
The Minister went on to say that there was no increase in unemployment, that the figures of the unemployed at the labour exchange at Carrick-on-Shannon showed a drop. The very same week the local paper in the area published a statement pointing out that a large number of men had been put out of work and had left the locality to go to England. It would be very hard to find the names of those men in the labour exchange as being unemployed when they had left the country.
It is no use trying to tell the people in the Arigna area that the figures for unemployment are less than they were 12 months ago. It is tragic for the people in the area to have to leave it but it is nothing less than criminal for the Minister to come into this House and suggest that there is no change in the situation and that there is less unemployment. You might say it is true that there are fewer unemployed registered but that is so because they have been running out of the locality for months past to work in England.
The third point made by the Minister was that much of the coal produced in the Arigna area was absorbed by the power station. The figure, so far as the power station is concerned, is that it consumes 45,000 tons a year. It is beyond dispute that any company in the area, and there are at least eight producers there, could produce 45,000 tons a year, but there is no market for their production. If the power station consumes 45,000 tons a year, it is extraordinary to find that, out of those eight companies, one company alone has the monopoly of supplying 35,000 tons a year.
I want to remind Deputies that in 1954 the Minister said to me that it was not his intention to help one coal producer more than another. He went on to assure me that there would be no such thing as preference or favouritism. Yet, we have the situation in the Arigna area that one company is supplying 35,000 tons out of a total of 45,000 tons a year to the generating station. The E.S.B., in giving that contract to this company, never asked for a public tender, never even inquired about competition but gave the contract to this company. Furthermore — and I should like the Minister to check the accuracy of this — I am informed that this company secured the right to supply 35,000 tons to the generating station for the next 25 years. I sought to establish the accuracy of that through a Parliamentary Question but I was ruled out of order: the question was one for the administration of the E.S.B. and consequently could not be the subject of a Dáil question. However, it is the belief in that locality that such is the position.
That raises a very important issue in this House. If one company can get a firm supply into the generating station of 35,000 tons a year for a number of years while there is no market available for the other seven producers is it not logical to assume that it is only a matter of time until those other producers go out of business? If they are blocked as far as the E.S.B., the Sugar Company and Cement Ltd., are concerned, it is only a matter of time until they go out of business.
What will happen then? Shall we not reach the extraordinary situation that one company will have a complete monopoly of the coal mining industry in the Arigna area? I wonder was it ever intended by this House that the State would set up a generating station owned by the public, run at public expense, and that one private company would still have a monopoly of supplying a State concern. That is what it will come to if the present situation is allowed to develop.
Would the Minister tell me if it is lawful for the E.S.B. to take a supply of coal without asking for a public tender? If there are eight people in a locality prepared to supply a county council institution, those eight people must be given a chance through two advertisements in the newspapers asking for tenders and for competition. It is mandatory that all suppliers be given an opportunity of quoting their price and it is up to the institution or the local authority concerned to decide who will get the right of supplying the commodity.
The E.S.B. are making no effort in Arigna to ensure that there is competition for supply. It seems that these agreements are made privately. One of the arguments put forward is that this company is the biggest producer; they have been sending coal to Dublin and elsewhere over the years and on that basis the E.S.B. consider they can make a firm contract with them. I do not care what private companies do. That is their business, but when the State is involved through a State company like the E.S.B. this House has a duty to the public to ensure that there is fair play for the community as a whole and that there is fair play for all the producers in the Arigna area. I shall not go any further at this stage because I might say too much, as far as the Minister is concerned. I want to keep this debate on a proper level and I do not want to have to suggest that there is an ulterior motive behind the apparent favouritism to one producer in the Arigna area.
