Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 4 Dec 1962

Vol. 198 No. 4

Committee on Finance. - Vote 45—Transport and Power (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:—

"That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration."—(Deputy D. Costello).

Mr. Crinion

I was saying here the last day we should develop our tourist industry to the utmost. In the past year, there has been a slight sinking back but I am glad to see that the Minister and the Tourist Board have realised that there is something wrong or that something needs to be done. I was pleased to see from the Minister's speech that they have discovered there is a need for Grade B hotels. We have been tending towards building nothing but grade A hotels. We certainly built some extremely good ones but we lack the hotels we need for a large number of our tourists. It is a welcome development that a couple of companies intend to build hotels near airports. It would be a great advantage at Shannon and certainly at Dublin to have a hotel right beside the airport to obviate the necessity of people having to travel long distances into the city to get accommodation particularly when merely staying overnight.

There is one matter in connection with Bord na Móna to which I should like to draw the attention of the Minister, that is, the amount of turf mould that has been going down the rivers, particularly the river in my area in County Meath, the Boyne, which divides Meath and Kildare. This turf mould coming down from the bogs at flood time spreads over the land. To give Bord na Móna their due, they spend quite an amount of money each year cleaning the drains and have tried to solve the problem by building cess ponds. I hope they will make further efforts to deal with this turf mould. After flooding there is this turf mould on the land and for the past four or five years it has gone next to the banks. On top of what used to be grass, there is turf mould to a depth of about six inches. If anything can be done to relieve the farmer in this respect it would certainly be greatly appreciated. From the fisherman's point of view, this has upset fishing for salmon on the Boyne which was one of the most famous salmon rivers in Ireland.

Over the years, the ESB have made great strides in providing rural electrification but there is one aspect of it which it is very hard for people to understand. They make an application to get electric light which may be only 100 or 200 yards away and when the return comes from the ESB, they find a very heavy special service charge imposed on them, while in another case when the ESB have to bring the light a bit further, there may be no special service charge or only a small one. That leads to a great deal of dissatisfaction among applicants in isolated places. It is rather unfair to them and I would ask the ESB to do whatever they can to try to get electricity to these isolated places at a lower cost. I know of one case where people are living on the main road within a mile of one of the generating stations and still it is considered an isolated place by the ESB. Such great efforts have been made in recent years to provide other amenities such as roadways and so on, that the ESB should make every endeavour to provide the one amenity we all appreciate, that is, electric light.

The provision of bottled gas does not fulfil the real need as it is very dear to install. Take the ordinary house that would need three lights. The fitting of the three lights costs £22. The people get a £10 grant after that but it still leaves them very far short of their requirements in regard to electric current because they are not able to have television or use an iron. They can cook with bottled gas which is a great help but we would like to see the ESB going a little further.

Over the years, the State-sponsored bodies under the control of the Minister's Department have been doing a very good job. They must be complimented on this because they have experienced some very difficult times. Again I should like to compliment the Minister on giving us details in regard to the activities of these State-sponsored bodies.

Mr. A. Barry

The Minister has acquired a reputation as a stonewall Minister who will not answer questions, but the day of reckoning comes. On this Estimate, he deserves the sympathy of the House but he would be wise to give a little more information. In that way irritation would not be added to the ordinary efforts of the Deputies to acquire information about the activities of all these bodies for which the Minister is once a year responsible. He has a very curiously patterned collection of activities to supervise. Most of them are in the red, and their methods of accounting would land the ordinary citizen in Carey Street or whatever corresponds in Ireland to the bankruptcy court.

The case made by Deputy McGilligan last Thursday is one that should be listened to. It was reasonably put. The figures on the balance sheets of all these State or semi-State bodies should state honestly the facts of the situation of each body. I do not think any pretence is called for. If the facts are faced, the bodies themselves will not suffer in any way. The idea of using phrases like "operating surplus" at once starts us searching for what the real operating loss is.

I was going to say that there was a suggestion of whistling past the graveyard but I hope that none of these activities will result in graveyards. I cannot see any justification for gilding the pattern of the loss that is obvious in all these bodies. If anything emerges from all this, it is that there is an unanswerable demand that figures should be given on the normal basis and there should be no gloss on them. If there is a subsidy, it should be made clear.

False optimism is no assistance of any kind to the bodies themselves, to the members of the House or to the public. It really only tends towards eroding our standards, and our duty now is to maintain standards at a very high level at this stage of our history.

I would suggest that the Minister's title should be changed. He should be called the Minister for Subsidised Bodies. Let us face the fact that we are attempting activities that must be subsidised for many years and probably during the lifetime of most of us will have to continue to be subsidised. If that is stated plainly, that he is the Minister in charge of those bodies which require to be subsidised, we could always have power to review progress, seeing where economies are taking place, reducing the subsidy or increasing it. If we know what the pattern is, we will not have to go back through balance sheets which are not produced in accordance with accepted practice.

The Minister is responsible for very important sectors of our economy, and except the ESB, they are all posing problems of assistance and continuing demand on the public purse. In fact, there is a curious slant on the situation. I learned from Deputy McGilligan last week when he was speaking that the only one of all these bodies that is not being subsidised is the one completely serving the Irish people, and the only other one that serves the Irish people does not require subsidy. That is a depressing fact.

Mr. Childers

Deputy McGilligan was wrong.

Mr. A. Barry

I take it that the Minister will correct me when he is replying. At any rate, if shipping has to be subsidised, it has to be subsidised; if flying has to be subsidised, it must be subsidised; if airports need subsidy, they must be subsidised. We do not subsidise our railways because they serve our own people, and we do no subsidise the ESB because it does not require subsidy. The others are losers and the dilemma is before us. It is quite understandable that we do not improve the situation, we do not raise our own standards of accounting and increase our concept of what the situation should be, by avoiding publication of the facts.

If we take them seriatim, the railway pattern is part of the world pattern that railways do lose money nowadays. The Minister deserves a good deal of sympathy for the line he has to take in attempting to maintain a reasonable amount of railway track, providing a reasonable service to a reasonable proportion of our population. He just cannot let it go. Indeed, I am going to repeat what I said before in this House—I think Dr. Andrews's task is a very difficult one, and we gave him the task in this House. The time is coming when we shall have to face a decision on whether we can continue to treat the railways on a hard financial basis or consider the part they play in the social structure. If we do subsidise shipping, mainly tramp shipping, and airlines, there is a case to be made for maintaining the railways for the social needs that they serve.

If I do express sympathy with the Board of CIE, there is also some evidence of some sudden decisions by that Board and of telescoped planning. There is a depot in Cork that employs well over 100 men, and the decision has been taken to close it. That is a major decision. It is a major decision indeed for the 100 families involved and for the prosperity of the city I have the honour to represent here. It is a decision that apparently has been taken very suddenly, because it was only last August that a number of apprentices were recruited there. That seems a curious thing. Then, some of the proposals for compensation being paid to displaced workers are almost in the realms of fantasy. Given a normal expectation of life, some of the pensioners will be drawing pensions in the year 2,000.

I wonder does the whole thing make sense and I wonder, as I said earlier in my speech and before in this House, whether the social needs and the entire pattern of our society must not be taken into account instead of excessive pigeon-holing, as we have done in the case of CIE? The pensions being paid to these quite young men, who are being discharged at a very early age, compare very favourably indeed with the pensions which the old railway company paid to employees who are now in their 70s and who served all their lives in the railways, whose pensions are in the region of shillings. That has been disgraceful to the railway company and to us. The Minister should, because nobody else can, make some effort to ensure more kindly treatment for these old railway employees than we have accorded them.

I do not know the proposal about the Rosslare to Mallow line but I do know that the Minister has mentioned expenditure which it is proposed to undertake at the port of Rosslare in order to improve the tourist trade and make it easier for tourists to come ashore there. Surely that railway line, which serves the whole south of Ireland and which runs through Wexford and Waterford to Mallow and on to Limerick and Kerry, is of immense importance to the tourist trade? If any money is to be spent in Rosslare to bring tourists into that area I want to make sure that no silly decision will be come to about taking up that railway line which should carry those tourists. If the railways go, we cannot handle the tourist trade. The Minister should consider the kind of traffic that comes ashore at Cork from a transatlantic liner and ask himself how that traffic could be handled without a railway line. The same applies to the port of Rosslare.

On the question of the airlines and airports, we must admit that this country has achieved considerable success in the air. When we survey the figures, we all feel a certain pride that Aer Lingus and Aerlinte have done so well. We know that their accounting is done in an unorthodox way but we have to face the fact that, when dealing with airports and airlines, ordinary accountancy does not apply. The Chairman of BOAC has said that he found himself in the straitjacket of cockeyed finance and by "cockeyed finance," I take it he meant that the accountancy was not done in the orthodox manner. The provision of air services for a small country in such a successful manner is something of which we can be proud and I would be less than generous if I withheld any credit from the Taoiseach for it.

The expenses on the airports make it essential for us to support them. We should endeavour to work these airports as hard as we possibly can. The airport opened at Cork last year has far exceeded the forecast made of the figures of use. Still, it is a slightly used airport and it would be used much more if the services were more extensive. I think the trouble is that we have got the problem of planes, that we have not got enough planes to meet all the demands on them.

I know that something should be done in association with other countries engaged in air activities about the problem of seats which are required at short notice. I had occasion to go to London last autumn at short notice and I was unable to get a seat in an Aer Lingus plane. The local management of Aer Lingus could not have been more courteous or active in seeking to get that seat for me. They contacted the London and Dublin offices to see if there were any cancellations but they could not get one and I had to travel by another route. I heard afterwards that the plane I sought to travel on did not travel fully loaded, that there were three seats vacant in it. I suppose that is one of the problems arising from a new mode of transport but I think that in order to counter that a substantial deposit should be put down when reservations are made.

I should like to hear from the Minister what has happened to the proposal to buy Caravels. I hear from travellers that this is an extremely good plane and I take it that the decision not to proceed with the purchase is based not so much on financial as on technical grounds. If airports like Cork are to function at a reasonably high level of activity, then the services will have to be much more frequent than they are.

Shannon Airport is now a very peculiar and a very great problem. Eight or nine years ago, in the days of piston aeroplanes, one would have said that it was one of the most important airports in the world. That importance has by-passed us now and every credit is due to those who operate that airport for the efforts they are making to catch up on the roundabouts what we have lost on the swings. The five or six hour flights across the Atlantic have posed a great problem for the type of traffic that Shannon had gone in for. All through the night, planes were coming in and landing there but now there are only occasional flights during the daytime.

There is a great catering service there of which we are all very proud but now the position has arisen that it is too large for the numbers being catered for. Every credit must be given to those who are making such great efforts to restore that airport to its former activity.

There is no doubt that it is a great thing to have Irish planes flying over the Atlantic every day. It is a great thing to see them flying the Irish flag. It does our hearts and the hearts of the Irish Americans good but I think they have contributed in no small way to the decline of Shannon Airport. The fact is that we creamed off the passenger trade to and from this country which had formerly justified other air lines landing here and paying landing charges. Now we are left with a very large stable holding our own coaches but with a very few other people's carriages calling there.

I hope the Minister will continue to resist the demand for Dublin landings. It was never wise to permit Aerlinte to by-pass Shannon. It weakened the case made in rebutting the demands of foreign airlines. The terminal port should have been Shannon and feeder services should have been organised from that port both to Dublin and the continent. The investment in Shannon is a major one. It is a colossal size, really, and we must sustain it and protect it by every means in our power.

I think Bord Fáilte are going places. Certainly visitors are coming to Ireland as a result of their activities. I believe Bord Fáilte are doing more to spread moneys and employment all over the countryside than any other activity over which the Minister has control. The Irish image they are projecting, the places in Ireland and the kind of place Ireland is, are slowly becoming accepted and, I think, successfully accepted. All the credit must be given there to those who administer the Board.

Our ordinary hoteliers are mainly very good. I take it that these new great groups organising big hotels here will be at least efficient and, really, efficiency is all you require from that size of hotel. You will not require, expect or get the friendly and homely treatment you get in the smaller establishment. I believe, and I hope the Minister agrees with me, that the smaller kind of hotel in Ireland makes a more valuable contribution to bringing back and tempting back all those who come to us than the larger hotel. It is a very difficult business in which to be engaged. It requires constant supervision for 24 hours of the day. Staffs are a continual difficulty.

Really, only the family concern can remain open successfully all the year round and that only with the family being content to engage in an interesting activity for a reasonable reward —not a great reward—with very hard work. The family hotel in this country with a good table, clean linen, and so on, is our greatest asset to the tourist trade. Added together, I think they are much more valuable than any of the bigger hotels now being planned, though the big hotels are necessary.

Is there any necessity for two tourist organisations? When the Bord Fáilte Bill was introduced into this House some years ago, I asked the Taoiseach who was then Minister for Industry and Commerce if it were necessary to have two tourist organisations. I know the reply will be that the other organisation is an organisation in respect of the tourist industry itself and that Bord Fáilte is something different. I still wonder if there is need for two such organisations and if there is not some overlapping, some duplication of function.

If Bord Fáilte were expanded to take over the whole function and, above all, to organise the local contribution in respect of special localised tourist projects, they probably would do it more efficiently. Taking a long term view rather than a short term one—which local activists usually take so that when results do not come up to expectations, they are inclined to retire from the activity—it would be better if all the moneys spent in every way in the country towns, villages and seaside resorts as well as on hotels, and so on, were under the control of one organisation.

I cannot say much about shipping except that I was surprised to read in the Dáil debates that all the ships we have put on the sea—fine ships they are—are plying, practically all the time, between one foreigner and another and very seldom come to Ireland. A lady came to me some time ago who wanted to get her son into the Irish merchant service. He was very anxious to go and whatever help I could give her I gave. However, she said that the only thing she did not like about it was that she would see her son so very seldom as he would be on the other side of the world most of the time.

It is curious that we do this carrying for foreigners on all the oceans of the world and that we subsidise it. Of course, many people are employed on the shipping services. It is a good career. The ships are good. It is a matter of pride, I suppose, to all of us to see the Irish flag on an Irish vessel. There are other points of view also. The fact that we have been able to have ships built in the new ship-building yard in Cork is very important. Apart altogether from the point of view of keeping the money for labour and material in this country —the industry has a very large labour content—particular skills are required which could not be acquired at home. The extraordinary agreements that have been made between employers and labour in the matter of demarcation disputes could be regarded as a landmark in 20th century industrial disputes. I know that it is a matter of amazement to naval architects from Great Britain that it can be done.

Mr. Childers

There is no deficit in respect of Irish Shipping. There is no annual subsidy from the Government.

Mr. A. Barry

I am going on the line of speeches I listened to last week. The Minister can correct these figures when replying. Irish shipping is positively in the black, is it not?

Mr. Childers

It does not earn enough appreciation at the low freight rates to renew its capital. There is no annual Vote at the moment.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

It is a credit loan without paying any dividend.

Mr. Childers

It was in the original Act that all dividends, if earned, would be put back into new shipping.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

It has never paid a dividend yet.

Mr. A. Barry

I do not mind if it does not pay a dividend, if we do not subsidise a loss. I shall listen with interest to what the Minister has to say when replying. I am very glad to see Irish boats there. I was sorry to hear they do not quite make the grade as regards paying back this capital. At some stage, I take it, some decision will be come to that freight rates will ease the picture so much that the shipping company can deal with it themselves. However, that is not my line of country. I do not know much about shipping.

I do know something about the ESB. It is a tribute to those who conceived it. It has made an extraordinary contribution to all activity in this country since 1922. The Minister was not particularly vocal about it. He devoted very little time during his speech to it. However, the figures were vocal enough. They spoke volumes for it. One of the important things about it is that, very largely, it is based on native fuel. That must be a very important thing for us.

Now for complaints. I have spoken before in reference to certain things about the ESB that annoy me. One is the disfiguring of the towns and cities with their supply poles. It is a small thing, an unimportant thing, but it should not be done. They should be asked to deliver current to the consumer in a more discreet manner. That is putting it as gently as possible.

I shall not enter into the dispute on the Fitzwilliam Street building because I think that probably the balance lies evenly between both sides. The design that has been selected is a pretty good design, by contemporary Irish architects. It will not look as badly as certain kinds of contemporary buildings would have looked. Thinking about this the other evening in the House, and looking around the walls at that fine collection of Malton prints of old Dublin, I thought the Minister might move one of them up a bit and put the architects in there to study them.

However, the ESB is doing a good job and with regard to Irish shipping activities, if they are not making a great deal of money, at least we do know they are well run and, if the price is high, it adds up to prestige and has established the Irish image as being contemporary and efficient.

Mr. Norton

There are a few matters I want to raise on this Estimate. The first is a matter which came to my personal notice some time ago when travelling from Cobh to Dublin by train and which reinforced the view I had acquired on a previous trip over the same line. Passengers coming off transatlantic liners at Cobh very frequently take the train from Cobh to Cork and there, probably, have to wait for a later train which comes on to Dublin. I am not interested at this stage in their having to wait for the later train but I am interested in the filthy condition of the train which carries these passengers from Cobh to Dublin. The one I travelled in recently could not have seen paint for many years. The carriage was dirty. The paint, whenever it was put on, was appallingly uninteresting and the whole thing had a horrible atmosphere around it.

Some passengers asked if that was the kind of train they had in Ireland. I had to assure them that it was probably the worst train in the country and that I could not understand why it was used for transportation between Cobh and Cork. It was a wretched carriage altogether. In addition, it was not heated, which was a source of complaint by many passengers. As an attempt to give a bleak and miserable picture of Ireland, it could not have succeeded better, at 8.30 that morning, to those people who, having come across the Atlantic in a spick and span ship, were huddled into this Cobh to Cork train. It was a scandalous performance. Whoever is responsible for putting a train of that kind into commission to convey tourists arriving in the country for the first time has not the foggiest notion of what it is necessary to do in order to present to tourists an acceptable, pleasing and memorable impression of a visit to Ireland.

I do not know whether any of our Cork Deputies has seen this piece of construction which plied on that day between Cobh and Dublin. Burning would be too expensive for it, it was such a wretched-looking carriage. I hope it will not be continued on the service, especially having regard to tourists, who have a right to expect something better.

Mr. A. Barry

It has been there since 1880.

Mr. Norton

There you are. That is the mentality in regard to the tourist trade today. An 1880 coach is used for tourists from America and then we wonder why they do not come in millions for the privilege of travelling in it. Somebody ought to look into this matter and have that coach put out of commission. It is a disgrace, but merely as a type of construction, but to our intelligence, that it should be used in 1962, when the world is on its toes to offer tourists the best possible comforts in the hope of attracting them for balance of payments purposes.

Mr. P.J. Burke

The Deputy is making the Cork Deputies blush.

Mr. A. Barry

He is not making me blush at all. I am not responsible.

Mr. Norton

Deputy Burke ought to be doing the blushing on this occasion. If that were a new coach, he would be the first in here to congratulate the Minister for putting it on and, no doubt, when a new coach is put on, the Deputy will not overlook the meed of praise he owes the Minister.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I would never forget any such little courtesy.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

I hope we do not get the Cobh coach at Rosslare.

Mr. Norton

Next I wish to deal with the question of canals, in particular the portion of the canal between Dublin and Robertstown. A canal is a most attractive type of waterway in a city, if kept in a proper condition. In Europe, canals are idolised by tourists. In those countries, where canals operate, the citizens take great pride in them. Every possible effort is made to make them as attractive as possible, not merely for the benefit of the local people, but also for tourists. Tourists frequent canals and rivers on the continent for pleasure-boating in a way that brings substantial return to those who operate the waterways. We have only to look at the canals in Belgium and Holland and the canal, which runs from Gotenburg in Sweden to Stockholm, to see how they are used, not merely to give pleasure but to obtain a substantial return. There are many other canals which could be cited.

The canal from Dublin to Robertstown in Kildare is about the filthiest stretch of water that could be found in the whole of Europe. Recently, two tourists came from London with a boat and, on arrival at the Ringsend Basin, started to sail for the Shannon. They had a good engine on the boat, a fact which made their journey less hazardous than otherwise it would have been. They had a pleasant sail for the first ten minutes and then they ran into every kind of impediment that it was possible for people, who wanted to dispose of rubbish, to dump into the canal from Mount Street Bridge to Robertstown.

These tourists wrote a letter to the papers. I hope the Minister saw that letter. It is hard to believe that the waterway they were trying to navigate was the Grand Canal. They painted such a horrible picture of it that it constituted the worst possible piece of propaganda for the canals. Others to whom I have spoken, and who have travelled on the canal, have told me there was not a word of exaggeration in the description given by those two English tourists of their efforts to get from Ringsend Basin to the Shannon. What did they say was wrong with the canal? First, it was choked with weeds, but apart from that, the canal was used as a kind of cemetery for asses, cattle, dogs and cats, abounding in old bed-steads, old bicycle wheels, rusty corrugated iron and every kind of rubbish. Yet that was the canal that ran virtually through the centre of the capital city of the country.

Either we are mugs and the rest of Europe are wizards or the position is the opposite, but every country in Europe is keeping its waterways open, doing its best to beautify its waterways, doing its best to make the waterways the highways of transportation. Here we virtually abandon the canals and now they are used as outdoor garbage bins in which the decomposed bodies of animals can be seen floating, available for inspection, and every kind of rubbish is dumped in the canal as well. I do not think it is fair to this city, I do not think it is fair to us as a people. I am convinced that the Minister or Bord Fáilte or some such body interested in the promotion of tourism with, perhaps, the aid of the Department of Local Government and the co-operation of CIE, could get together and clean the canal of weeds and at the same time remove all the refuse, while taking steps to stock the canal with coarse fish, and thus provide a first-class waterway which would be used much more extensively than it is used to-day for transportation.

You would provide a very substantial measure of enjoyment for harassed citizens of Dublin and district who might on week evenings in the summer or autumn spend their leisure time in coarse fishing from the banks of the canal, and if the banks were tidied up and made clean, then they would provide very pleasant boulevards for people who want a stroll in the evenings along a piece of thoroughfare which in every other country is a natural attraction for the walker or those who like to saunter in the evenings. Something ought to be done about this canal; something can be done about it.

Ninety per cent. of the work to be done is labour content and I would strongly urge the Minister to avail of whatever powers and status he has in this matter to get the canal cleaned up, the banks made properly and the debris removed, because if God ever sends us a dry summer, there will be disease in this city as sure as we are sitting in the Dáil this evening. You could not expect anything else having regard to the putrid contents of the canal for a distance of 20 to 30 miles. If it is worth cleaning the canal from the point of view of tourism, it must be worth far more doing so from the point of view of beautifying the city and providing amenities for many people. I hope the Minister will take time off from lecturing the public on CIE and devote a little more time to trying to beautify the canal and removing the debris. If he did that, we would be getting places.

I want to make a reference to CIE, not at any great length. At all events, I want to express a point of view on behalf of my Party, lest silence on the subject might give the impression that we thought as the Minister apparently thinks. In 1958, when the Transport Bill was going through, the intention was that CIE would be subsidised to the extent of £1,175,000 per year for a period of five years. I said then and I say it again that I never believed that was possible of achievement. You can always get a sheet of paper and a pencil and write down what your theory is, but some of the things frequently overlooked in making these calculations are the imponderables you have to consider in the light of events in the meantime.

The position is that the CIE subsidies are due to end in March, 1964. We are very near March, 1963. What is the position? The loss on CIE up to March, 1962, was approximately £1,700,000. I gather from a speech made by the Minister the other day that the supposition is there will be approximately the same loss for the year ending March, 1963. Then we have only one year to go for the final and fifth year and in that year, from a loss of approximately £1,700,000, CIE have to become a line-ball undertaking. I do not believe that will happen, unless in the 12 months from March, 1963, to March, 1964, there is to be a wholesale closure of the railway lines involving large scale dismissals and the truncation of a very substantial portion of what are regarded today as our normal railway services, and have been so regarded since railways were first introduced into this country.

I should like to ask the Minister if he seriously thinks CIE will be able to carry on without a subsidy after March, 1964, in view of the fact that the anticipation is they will lose approximately £1,700,000 in the 12 months ending in March next. I do not know how this miracle is to be brought about, but even if it could be brought about, it seems to me a most dangerous kind of miracle and I can see its being achieved only by the closing of large sections of the railway and the throwing out of employment of a large number of married men who have dedicated themselves to the service of the railways. I do not know whether the Minister regards himself as having some supernatural directive instinct to make the Irish railways pay or whether this is just a political passion with the Minister, that, being very anxious to get publicity on as many occasions as possible, he feels obliged to talk about CIE almost every time he speaks.

I want to say to the Minister that his speeches have created an atmosphere of uncertainty and crisis about the operation of our railway service. Every time the Minister speaks on CIE, we are told about the appalling losses, about the necessity to get away from deficits per annum, about the necessity to end the subsidy at the earliest possible date. I ask myself can this be done and what price must we pay for ending the subsidy. The subsidy is not one for somebody living in Siam: it is for everybody travelling on the Irish railways and it is necessary because of the fact that we continue to export 40,000 people every year and, with a falling population, we expect our railways to pay.

Mr. Childers

Not 40,000.

Mr. Norton

Railways do not pay in Britain and would the Minister tell us in what other country in Western Europe they pay?

Sir Anthony Esmonde

Holland is the only one.

Mr. Norton

In Western Europe, densely populated as it is, I doubt if even Holland can make the railways pay. In any case if they do, there might be an exceptional reason for their paying in a small country such as Holland, having regard to its size and density of population. Why we should make such a fetish of balancing the budget in relation to railways regardless of the price seems to me to demand an explanation from the Government because apparently we will not get it from the Minister.

Every time the Minister speaks of railways, it is a crisis speech. We are told of imminent happenings, of railway lines that must be torn up and of the diversion of further traffic from the railways to the roads, and a long dissertation then on the percentage of freight and the number of lorries necessary to transport it by road as against the transport which has been provided by the railways. The Minister ought to give CIE a rest from speeches. There must be some subject on which the Minister can talk besides CIE. I do not want to deprive him in the slightest of the publicity he likes to accumulate for himself but I do suggest CIE want a rest and that this firebrigade administration which enshrouds it from the constant speeches by the Minister is not calculated to give people the impression that it is a thriving, progressive service.

Well and good if CIE can become a lineball financially and well and good if they can eliminate losses. Everybody will welcome that, but I do not think there is any purpose in the Minister's continuing to make these crisis speeches and giving the impression that the only thing that matters to this country is the balancing of the CIE budget. There are 22,000 Irishmen employed in CIE. When you consider the fact that substantial sums of money have been given to people who come to this country to establish industry who have never employed a fraction of the 22,000 employed by CIE, we say that CIE, being the biggest employer of labour in the country, is entitled to a reasonable deal from Parliament.

This virus that CIE must pay is of only relatively recent growth. There has been an intelligent acceptance of the fact that in the circumstances of our scattered population, with a country large sections of which are denuded of population, lower than that of any other country in western Europe, when we have special transport difficulties, we should try to meet them. But let us meet them in a reasonable way. It is a great mistake to make a fetish out of balancing the budget of CIE, especially when we know the balance will be effected by firing men out of employment who have given long service to the railway companies.

The Minister ought to take a balanced view of this whole situation and CIE ought to be allowed to do whatever they can do within the ambit of the legislation passed by this House. It is unreasonable to lead them to believe they are engaged in a death or glory struggle to be ended in March, 1964, and that there will be medals for those who will balance the budget of CIE in March, 1964, irrespective of the long line of economic casualties in the form of unemployed men which will be necessary in order to achieve that balance.

Many other activities in this country are being subsidised and being subsidised not in the interests of our own people. We are paying millions of pounds in the subsidisation of commodities which are exported from this country. The subsidy we pay to the British for eating our butter would go a long way towards subsidising CIE which would be a subsidy to our own people travelling on our own railway system. There ought to be some effort to balance this in a rational way instead of getting this tangent on the whole thing, leading people to believe that something mesmeric will happen if we can only manage to balance this budget. We do not balance our budget for air services; we do not balance our food exports budget; there are many other activities of this kind we do not balance. Why do we insist on a balance being achieved in an industry which employs 22,000 persons and does not require any subsidy in order to do so?

I should like to call the Minister's attention to the fact that under the 1958 Act, the compensation payable, because of redundancy or worsening of conditions, expires, I think, in July, 1963, that is, next year. If we are to have redundancy, dismissals or retirements, due to worsening of conditions after July, 1963, I take it the Minister will introduce the necessary legislation to prolong that provision of the 1958 Act and thereby provide coverage against redundancy and worsening of conditions, which will terminate in July, 1963. I should like to have an assurance from the Minister that that will be done. I am quite satisfied there will be further redundancy after 1963, if the present policy is maintained and if that is so, then there must be reasonable treatment for those who are employed by the national transport undertaking.

I suspect from a speech made the other day that the Minister considers that there may have to be rethinking in regard to transport. I got from his speech the impression that there might have to be a competition between rail and road. Again that is just resort to anything that has the element of novelty about it. In a small country such as this, where there is a scattered population, very few large centres of population, what we ought to aim at is an integrated transport service. Trying to play Dublin off against the provinces, to play the provinces off against Dublin, to play the railways off against the buses may have its appeal if you are dealing with facets of the problem but there can only be one sound transport policy for the country, that is, an integrated transport policy. That transport policy ought not to be based upon clipping off what are described as uneconomic portions of the transport services. Transport services necessary for 1962 standards of living ought to be maintained.

If the whole problem of CIE is approached coldly, calmly and with a recognition of the peculiarities of this country, we can probably provide a transport service under reasonable conditions and giving a reasonable measure of satisfaction. However, if we are to have this type of firebrigade administration, brinkmanship speeches telling us of the grave dangers which lie ahead in CIE, then a state of hysteria will be created in which CIE will not merely become a joke in every musichall in the country but will be denied these elements which are necessary if the service is to grow and to prosper.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I listened very attentively to Deputy Norton. I was hoping to hear from him some constructive suggestion, some constructive criticism from which the Minister might be able to benefit. I have a soft spot for transport because it was as a result of the defeat of the Government on the Transport Bill in 1944 that I came into this House. I came in at that time on that snap election.

Mr. Norton

That was a day of great rejoicing. I remember meeting the Deputy.

Mr. Corish

The Deputy was one of the few who got an advantage from CIE.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I was one of the few who got some advantage from transport.

Mr. Norton

The Deputy should not denigrate himself—he deserved it.

Mr. P.J. Burke

It is kind of the Deputy to say so.

Mr. Norton

Very.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I do not wish to misrepresent what Deputy Norton said here this afternoon, but the impression I got from his speech was that we should continue subsidising CIE, even subsidising uneconomic units and branch lines which the people have refused to use for years. I have taken a great interest in CIE. I went on deputations to CIE, and even to the Great Northern Railway when certain lines were being abandoned by that company. It was proved to us that these lines were not paying.

Successive Governments have approached this problem of transport. Deputy Norton was Minister for Industry and Commerce in his Government. He dealt with CIE in his time. He suffered the same headaches as the present Minister suffers. He was up against the same problems. He had to try to find money to subsidise CIE. There are portions of the CIE system which are completely uneconomic. The people will not use them. They prefer to use cars or lorries. Emphasis is laid on certain small towns which, it is alleged, will suffer if branch lines are closed down. The fact is that the traders in these towns contribute nothing to these lines. They prefer to use private transport.

Under the 1958 Act, we appointed a Board and we appointed a Chairman of that Board. I do not like mentioning names here, but the Chairman of that Board is maligned inside and outside this House. He is expected to work miracles. In my opinion, he deserves sympathy. He deserves the sympathy and thanks of this Dáil and of the people for trying to do a very tough job. Those responsible for Aer Lingus, the ESB, CIE, Bord na Móna and the Sugar Company have all done a very fine job in these various semi-State organisations.

The country owes the present Chairman of CIE a good deal because he was one of the founder organisers of Bord na Móna, and he did an impossible job. A man of his type and calibre is not going to do anything which will discredit this nation. Men of his type were soldiers of Ireland when soldiers of Ireland were few. These men, appointed as chairman of these various boards, are appointed to do a national job. In my heart of hearts, I feel none will do anything except what he believes is best in the interests of the nation as a whole.

I should not wish to see any man displaced. All my life I have been trying to get people jobs and more money in an effort to create an atmosphere of economic wellbeing. We are dealing here with CIE. We are trying to make CIE an economic unit. If the State could afford it, we should like to have more money to spend on social services, more money for capital investment for the benefit of the nation as a whole. That would bring back some return; it would decrease our adverse trade balance because we would be able to export more goods and employ more people.

Deputy Norton was Minister in two Coalition Governments here. He was Minister for Industry and Commerce in one of them. He and his Government did not work any miracles during their period in office. A somewhat similar situation existed then as exists now. There was another Board in operation. A very honourable man was Chairman of that Board. He did his job well. That Board tried to do their best. Expert outside advice was sought as to what should be done and what should not be done. Mr. Dan Morrissey was then Minister for Industry and Commerce.

It is a comment on the whole situation that in England to-day those in charge of transport are following our example. Certain lines are uneconomic. The people in certain parts of England are not using the railways. What is one to do when faced with such a situation? If people prefer other forms of transport, if they will not travel on the railways, what is one to do? If traders in Dublin want to send their goods by private lorry, they will do so. No Minister can compel them to do otherwise.

The present Minister has plenty of headaches and people should be fair in their criticism of him. What is the Minister or the Chairman of CIE to do if people will not use the system? One cannot ask this House to subsidise that system and keep it going; but that is what we are being asked to do here. When Deputy Norton was Minister for Industry and Commerce, I was trying to keep the Hill of Howth tram in operation. I played the band just as good as anybody else did in order to keep it going. I remember going in one day with about 20 others, to see the general manager and the chairman of the Great Northern Railway. Before we got down to discussion, the chairman said: "Gentlemen, just before you start, will you tell me how you came down from the summit?"

Mr. Norton

That was a hard one for an opening question.

Mr. P.J. Burke

It was, and not one had come down in the tram; they all came down in private cars.

Mr. Norton

That was bad tactics.

Mr. P.J. Burke

And they were all wailing about the trams going off.

Mr. Childers

Had you not the railways too?

Mr. P.J. Burke

Yes. We kept the trams in operation for about nine years afterwards.

Mr. Corish

Even though they were uneconomic.

Mr. P.J. Burke

There was no road. I used the argument that the road was bad and that the trams should be left there until the Corporation made a new road. Eventually the trams had to go. I am only giving that as an example of the fact that all over the country people did not want to use the system but once anything happened, they cried out asking why it was done.

As far as I can see, the present Chairman of CIE and the Board deserve the thanks of this House for the national work they are doing. The only thing I hope is that when any employees are made redundant, they will get adequate compensation for their long years of service, because the State should try to treat these dedicated men properly. Even if the Minister has to come to this House for a vote, I think the whole House would support him in a generous attitude. I do not like to see any man after years in any employment just thrown on the scrap-heap and given a little so that he will just fade away and not be able to look after himself, if he is a single man, or look after his wife and his family, if he is married.

I quite agree with Deputy Norton that dirty coaches should not be tolerated on the journey to Cobh or to any of our principal stations. Wherever they go, up-to-date clean trains will make an impression on any visitors coming to this country and be a part of our tourist make-up. At the same time, I was surprised when Deputy Norton mentioned that such a thing should happen, because any time I travelled up or down the country, I found the trains all right. I do not know whether they put on a special train for me when they got to know when I was travelling. The canals are really a problem.

Mr. Norton

Use them to wash the railways.

Mr. Burke

The old lock gates are falling off. The canals have become completely uneconomic. That is another part of the dead weight that the Chairman and Board of CIE had to deal with. Deputy Norton wants the canals to be kept going as waterways, but I wonder what it will cost the State to keep them clean as a waterway, and what Board are going to do it. Are we to set up an Inland Water Board for our waterways? How are we to collect the revenue to keep the canals going? Those are problems we have to face.

Aer Lingus is another semi-State body that has done a very good job over the years. While it had a deficit this year, I hope that next year will be better.

Mr. Childers

They had no operating deficit this year.

Mr. Burke

I understood they had.

Mr. Childers

No.

Mr. Burke

I shall go into that. I may have slipped up on that statement but I shall go into it again. It is very encouraging to see that Irish Shipping is doing so well, notwithstanding certain items that have been met from time to time. In my opinion, all the semi-State bodies the Minister is responsible for administering have excelled themselves. Take Bord na Móna, which is going from success to success, Aer Lingus, Aer Rianta, Irish Shipping, the ESB and Bord Fáilte.

Bord Fáilte is one of my pet subjects, and I would like to see Bord Fáilte doing a little more work, especially in the tourist areas adjacent to the city of Dublin. Two local authorities I have been associated with have been trying to get certain work done through Bord Fáilte but I believe the red tape there still is killing some of the projects we have sought to have carried out. For some years, we have been trying to get something worthwhile in Skerries but we have been frustrated in that regard and I should like the Minister, when he has time, to look into that matter.

We have also been trying to get something done in Portmarnock, to which resort at least 20,000 or 30,000 people come out from the city. Even Dublin Corporation is most anxious to make a contribution there, because it concerns the city more than the county while it is only a few miles from the city boundary. These are detailed matters and I do not want to go into them now, but in general, Bord Fáilte has done a wonderful job since it was established. Its officers and its organisation generally in this and in other countries deserve the thanks of the Dáil and of the Irish people. We are definitely grateful to them.

Regarding the Irish Tourist Association, while Deputy Barry said he did not think there should be two organisations, I should like to see the second organisation continued. It has its value. It is made up of representatives of each local authority throughout the country and it is keeping more people personally interested. They come to meetings, and whereas Bord Fáilte is a smaller, more compact body altogether, governed and controlled by a board, the Irish Tourist Association is a good body because it is well to have an organisation of public representatives and people generally, whether their criticisms are destructive or constructive. Such an organisation helps the country and shows that democracy is properly in action.

These are the great things we have achieved in our time. No country in the world should be prouder of its semi-State bodies than Ireland because every one of them without exception, has been an outstanding success and we have produced some of the greatest characters of all time in administering the affairs of these bodies. They are the economic heroes of this nation.

Mr. T. O'Donnell

So much has been said about the various sections in this Estimate that it is difficult to avoid repetition, but I hope to do so. There are two sections of the Estimate on which I have some personal knowledge and which vitally concern my constituency. I refer to those sections which concern Shannon Airport and the Shannon Industrial Estate. The present situation at Shannon merits a much more detailed examination than has been given to it up to now. To get a clear picture of the present setup at Shannon, it is necessary to distinguish clearly between Shannon as an airport and Shannon as an industrial estate.

For the past few years, the airport at Shannon has had many difficulties to contend with. Companies came and have gone and there has been considerable fluctuation in the numbers employed there. The future of Shannon as a passenger airport is indeed very doubtful. The redundancy in the catering section which occurred in the past week is, I think, the final blow to Shannon as a passenger airport.

Many factors have been responsible in recent years for the present situation at Shannon. Newer and better types of aircraft have been developed and the transatlantic crossing time has been cut down considerably. All this has affected Shannon but one factor more than any other which has affected it is the decision to fly the transatlantic jets to Dublin Airport. There is no doubt whatever that this decision has had disastrous results for Shannon and I am not satisfied that there were genuine grounds for deciding to have the transatlantic air terminal at Dublin Airport. I feel, and many people at Shannon and Limerick feel, that Shannon should have been the terminal for the jet aircraft and that a feeder service should be operated from Shannon to Dublin and Cork. In this way, you would have the servicing plants at Shannon and you would possibly have avoided the persistent efforts of the other operators to get into Dublin Airport also.

I think it is now pretty definite that the introduction of the transatlantic service by Aerlínte has had disastrous results for Shannon. This was envisaged to a certain extent when Aerlínte was inaugurated. The Shannon Development Company has seen this and has been trying to develop a freight traffic at Shannon. It is from this idea of preserving Shannon as an airport that this industrial estate was born. One of the main objectives of the industrial estate was to promote air freight traffic through Shannon Airport. It now seems pretty definite, particularly from the redundancy in the catering service, that Shannon as a passenger airport has very little future. If we want to maintain Shannon as an airport, the only hope seems to lie in the future development of freight traffic through it.

Whether this is possible is a very debatable point and one has to look at the industrial estate to see how far it has contributed up to the present in maintaining the traffic at the airport. I think the results have not been very satisfactory. Recently I asked a question here seeking the figures for air freight through Shannon and these figures show that only about one-third of the entire air freight through Shannon has been generated by the industrial estate. The firm which is sending most goods through Shannon is one which is sited at Ennis. The industrial estate has not generated the amount of air freight which it was expected to generate. The question now remains as to how far we can expect the industrial estate to contribute to freight traffic at the airport in the future.

The future of the industrial estate at the present stage of its development raises a considerable number of difficulties, in my opinion. I want to say that the industrial estate as such has been a success and there is nobody more delighted with this success than I am but we have to be realistic about its future. A situation has now been reached there where labour is being recruited from long distances. People are travelling to work at Shannon from distances of 20 or 30 miles. Within the past fortnight, I had discussions with the company regarding the question of transport to the industrial estate and last Monday week a bus service was provided from my home town, a distance of 30 miles. About 25 young people are travelling on that bus every morning and returning home in the evening.

I am quite happy to see them getting on that bus every morning. I would rather see them go to Shannon than to Birmingham. These are young people, mainly in the 16 to 18 years age group. They have to get up at a very early hour in the morning and travel long distances to their work and the question arises whether that long journey impairs their efficiency. The question also arises as to whether they are being compensated sufficiently for the inconvenience of this journey. At the end of the first week, six or seven of those young people who had started off working at Shannon pulled out and decided that they would not continue working there. The reason was that they were starting in one of the industries and were receiving 50s. a week. The weekly fare to the estate was 30s., which left them with £1. There were other incidental expenses during the day and from the information I got, I found that on an average they had 7s. 6d. or 10s. at the end of the week.

This is significant because if the industrial estate at Shannon is to expand and if more industries are to be sited there, provision will have to be made for the subsidisation of fares from outside areas. Transport from the city of Limerick to the industrial estate at Shannon Airport is subsidised but not beyond Limerick city. If other industries are to be sited at Shannon, then the Industrial Development Company will of necessity have to examine very carefully the provision of transport from, in addition, the towns I have mentioned. It is quite likely that there will be different bus service from Newcastle West, Croom, Newport, Castleconnell and all the outlying areas. It would be very difficult to recruit sufficient labour at these distances, unless conditions were made reasonably attractive.

There is another alternative regarding the recruitment of labour at the industrial estate, that is, the provision of hostel accommodation at the estate and the provision of housing and other amenities there. However, in view of the fact that the industrial estate, as such, has not provided the air freight traffic that was expected, one must now ask the question: Is there any reason why future industry should not be located at Limerick city or at Ennis——

Mr. Childers

That is what I wanted to know. The Deputy is against the industrial estate. I was waiting for that.

Mr. A. Barry

The Minister is very unfair.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

The Minister is getting cross.

Mr. T. O'Donnell

All this matter is of tremendous significance. I am as much interested in the future of Shannon as anybody else. Why the Minister should impute any ulterior motives to me in examining this matter in detail, I do not know.

Mr. Childers

The Deputy has been indulging, for the past ten minutes, in double talk of the worst description in relation to this matter. It is not of the least help to me in answering——

Sir Anthony Esmonde

It is the only opportunity the Deputy has. The Minister will not answer questions. This is the only chance the Deputy has of asking questions.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy O'Donnell.

Mr. T. O'Donnell

I am concerned with the future of the industrial estate at Shannon and particularly its contribution to air freight traffic at Shannon Airport. I believe that this matter will have to be faced up to. I am not introducing all this or going into it in detail in order to make a case for the establishment of industries in my constituency. If the industrial estate at Shannon is to expand and is to get all its labour requirements, the difficulties I have mentioned will have to be overcome. Proper transport to the industrial estate will have to be provided and it will have to be subsidised. Alternatively, as I said, it is possible to overcome the difficulty by having hostel accommodation and adequate housing at Shannon.

Before the Minister interrupted me, I posed a question as to whether or not it is wise to continue to offer the same attractions and inducements to industrialists at Shannon to the disadvantage of Limerick and Ennis and the surrounding areas. If the industries at present sited at the airport and future industries which may be sited there do not play their part in maintaining Shannon as an airport, by providing freight traffic, then I see no point whatever in siting future industries there.

I see no reason why these industries could not be set up in the large centres of population I have mentioned. I have already stated that the best customer that Shannon has for air freight is a firm at Ennis. It is estimated that the cost of conveying goods by air is roughly three times more than that of conveying them by sea between Ireland and the United States.

This question of Shannon has been a very topical one in Limerick over the years. Considerable propaganda has been made out of it. I have seen the posters which have been plastered all over my constituency to the effect that the future of Limerick depends on the future of Shannon. The people were told, in effect: "If you vote for Fine Gael, they will close Shannon. Therefore, Limerick will be a ghost town."

It is rather surprising that the people who were so vocal in the past in lauding Shannon Airport and in condemning the supposed attitude of Fine Gael towards Shannon should be silent in recent weeks when the airport was faced with the crisis of redundancy in the catering section. I am genuinely interested in the future of Shannon, both as an airport and as an industrial estate. On numerous occasions in recent weeks and in recent months, I have gone out to the airport and had discussions with various people there and at the industrial estate. I can assure the Minister that I have raised this matter here and gone into it in detail, not for any personal motives——

Mr. Childers

Heavens!

Mr. T. O'Donnell

This is a very complicated matter and there are many difficulties to be faced. Are we now faced with this situation that the future of Shannon as a passenger airport is very much in doubt but that, on the other hand, there is a possibility of developing air freight traffic? I realise that the development of air freight depends on a number of factors outside the Minister's control, the most important being the success of the present efforts on the part of aircraft manufacturing companies to design aircraft suitable for the carriage of freight. The future of air freight in general will depend to a large extent on that factor.

There is another possibility for Shannon, apart from air freight. There is the possibility of maintaining the passenger traffic to the airport. While the proposition has been put forward that the future of Limerick depends on the future of Shannon, I have always held the belief, and still hold it, that the future of Shannon as an airport depends on the development of the entire region stretching from Ennis to Limerick city and county. There is a very large tourist potential in this area. I was particularly pleased to note that in recent months the Shannon Development Company has been interesting itself in the promotion of tourism in the area. This potential could be exploited. In this area there are the finest fishing facilities in Europe. There is the River Shannon. Throughout Clare, there are numerous lakes some of which are in process of development and others which have not yet been touched. There are throughout County Limerick fishing waters which as yet have not been developed commercially.

Could the Shannon Development Company not get into this matter of promoting tourism in the area adjoining the airport and might it not tackle this matter in a much more determined and aggressive fashion than has been the case up to now? Another question: Would the Shannon Development Company at this stage be better employed in concentration on the promotion of tourism rather than the bringing of other industries to the airport?

There is a great deal that can be done by local groups to promote tourism in the area. I shall instance one little experiment which was carried out, again in my home town, just two years ago. A local development group, under the auspices of Muintir na Tíre, organised an annual festival. The idea occurred to us that it would be a very nice thing if, during the period of the festival, many of our exiles could be at home. All the people from the locality who are living in exile were contacted and a group in New York chartered a special plane which brought to Shannon 135 exiles for that week. Next year it is hoped that we will have plane loads of exiles coming in from New York and other centres in the United States of America and from Britain. If local groups received the encouragement they should receive and if the Shannon Development Company made a determined effort to promote tourism in this area and to exploit the tremendous natural tourist attractions there, the future of Shannon as an airport would not be so gloomy as it would now appear to be.

In this area, there is the added tourist attraction of outstanding hunting facilities. If there were a progressive and really determined policy, it should be possible to develop fishing and hunting. By reason of the hunting tradition in the area, where there are several packs of hounds and tremendous hunting country, the tourist season could be extended right through the winter. Hunting is generally carried on between the months of October and April.

I put it, therefore, to the Minister, that perhaps, Bord Fáilte and the Shannon Development Company might tackle this question and at some not too distant date, a conference might be held of all interested parties for the formulation of a co-ordinated policy.

The questions of Shannon Airport and the Shannon Development Company are the two matters with which I am most concerned but there are a few other matters arising on the Estimate to which I wish to refer. I must confess that I am rather confused by the Minister's attitude towards his responsibility regarding the operations of Córas Iompair Éireann. I realise that the Minister is not responsible, and obviously cannot be responsible, for the day-to-day administration of CIE but I do feel that, as a member of the Government, the Minister cannot disclaim his moral and social obligations towards the people whose lives and fortunes have been affected by the decisions of the Board of CIE.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.