Deputy Harte has given notice of his intention to raise the subject matter of Question No. 52 on the Order Paper.
Adjournment Debate. - Meevagh (Donegal) Boatyard.
At Question Time to-day, I asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Lands certain questions in relation to the Meevagh boatyard in Donegal. First, I want to say that from the time I was asked to inquire into the troubles at this boatyard.I felt I should pursue a course of delayed action. I did not want to be too much on the attack against the Parliamentary Secretary, because I felt, if I pursued a certain line of attack and if this boatyard were eventually closed, the Fianna Fáil Party could say: "Your Fine Gael representative in North-East Donegal helped to close it." I was content to allow the Department and Bord Iascaigh Mhara to do everything they could to try to solve the difficulties confronting the men there. I regret to say that, having waited almost five months, I found nothing happened.
To-day I tabled the following question to the Minister for Lands:
To ask the Minister for Lands the number of boats, similar to those built in Irish boatyards, purchased by State grants or loans in Scottish, English and other foreign markets; the total amount of (a) grants and (b) loans given; and the rate of interest charged on loans.
The question the Deputy gave notice of was Question No. 52.
Questions Nos. 51, 52 and 53 are all relevant.
There is only one question to be discussed, that is Question No. 52.
Question No. 52 was:
To ask the Minister for Lands if he will make a comprehensive statement relative to the future of Meevagh Boatyard, County Donegal in view of the great disquiet in that area over the mishandling of the matter by An Bord Iascaigh Mhara.
The reply to that question was as follows:
The scale of operations at any boatyard depends on the volume of boatbuilding and repair work available.It is regrettable that there was a walk-out of staff at Meevagh boatyard in August last, but I am satisfied that no blame attaches to Bord Iascaigh Mhara for the handling of the matter. As to the future, I am hopeful that the various incentives in the Government's Programme of Sea Fisheries Development will lead to increasing demand for new boats and expansion of boat-building.
I want to say, first, that there was no detailed reference in that to the Meevagh boatyard. This yard has employed 14 workers for the past 50 years. In the spring of this year, the workers became suspicious as to the happenings at the boatyard. In consultation with their union representatives, they held a meeting in Donegal town. They were convinced after that meeting that the future of the boatyard was in question. They knew some of the workers would be laid off, but they did not know which. They agreed amongst themselves that if any were paid off, they would all walk out. I admire that decision. At the same time, they contacted their public representatives. They contacted me and I, in turn, made representations to Bord Iascaigh Mhara. I got an assurance from the Parliamentary Secretary that there was no truth in the rumours circulating.
On 29th July, however, I got a telephone message inviting me to a meeting of the workers in Downings. I understood that all public representatives were to attend that meeting. I attended and found no public representative but myself present. I was asked to preside. I did so, but I warned the boat-builders that any decision they arrived at would be their own decision and that I would not influence them one way or another. I did try to guide them to the best decision. They were determined that if the notices were not withdrawn, they would all walk out.
The Dáil adjourned on 19th July, and on 27th July, seven men received notice. That decision must have been known to Bord Iascaigh Mhara before the Dáil went into recess. I feel common courtesy demanded that a Deputy who had been in contact with the Department on this matter should have been notified of any decision it was his business to know. I received no communication from Bord Iascaigh Mhara. I was surprised when I received the telephone message to attend the meeting. I promised to bring the matter to the notice of Bord Iascaigh Mhara the following day. I phoned a civil servant in Bord Iascaigh Mhara and told him the men were prepared to stay on the boat until it was finished. They claimed there was at least two months' work for the 14, but the Department felt they would be in one another's way.
Despite the promises made by the Minister for Local Government that the Parliamentary Secretary was doing all in his power to promote more work in the yard, they were not prepared to yield one way or the other. At this time, the Parliamentary Secretary attended a meeting of the Sea Angling Festival in Killybegs. On the front page of the Derry Journal of August 20th there appears a photograph of the Parliamentary Secretary—a very handsome one, too, if I might say so. On the same front page, however, appears the heading “Fears for Future of Donegal Boatyard.” If the Parliamentary Secretary had Meevagh boatyard at heart he would have visited it from Killybegs. He had with him Mr. Brendan O'Kelly, chairman of Bord Iascaigh Mhara.
The next relevant item which appeared in the newspaper was on Tuesday, 3rd September, when the Minister for Local Government, who had failed to attend any of the previous meetings, turned up at a joint meeting of the local development association and the workers. The heading on the front page of the Derry Journal read: “Meevagh Boatyard Won't Close.” This is the crux of the matter and this is the point I want cleared up: While the Minister says in Donegal that Meevagh Boatyard will not close, the Parliamentary Secretary in this House admits that is in doubt——
No.
You refused to answer today. We want to know what you are going to do about Meevagh boatyard.Are you going to get work for it?
Will the Deputy please address the Chair? He should use the third person.
When the Parliamentary Secretary is replying he might tell us what is the future of the Meevagh boatyard.The Fianna Fáil Government closed Meevagh in 1947. Deputy Dillon, when Minister for Agriculture, opened it and it remained open until July of this year. If any effort had been made by An Bord Iascaigh Mhara to get extra employment for those who were working at Meevagh boatyard the yard would still be working.
A further headline appeared in the Derry Journal on 10th September from Bord Iascaigh Mhara. It said: “Outlook Gloomy for Meevagh Boatyard, says Board.” I do not want to labour this point but if the Minister for Industry and Commerce can give millions to the Verolme boatyard at Cobh, it is not too much to expect that a boat should be built at Meevagh boatyard, so that 14 men can be kept in employment. I feel it is an abuse of the moneys of our citizens that so much is being poured into Cobh boatyard to facilitate the millionaires of the world, to facilitate foreigners, while boat-builders in Donegal, anxious to work and build fleets for the fishermen of this nation, are left without employment.
The second-best industry this nation has is fisheries but the Parliamentary Secretary is failing in his duty to promote better facilities for the workers in boatyards. As a warning, I say that today Meevagh boatyard is being closed down; tomorrow it will probably be Killybegs, and then Baltimore or Dingle. It is a ridiculous situation when people in the fishing industry can go to Scotland or England and purchase vessels with the aid of Government loans while at the same time, men are being put out of work in a boatyard in Donegal.
I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to come down off his high horse and pay a visit to Donegal. Let him forget the stories that officials of Bord Isacaigh Mhara tell him; let him forget all the stuff he reads in books and come down to practical knowledge of what the fishermen and boat-builders of the country want. If the Parliamentary Secretary came to Donegal and spoke to the 14 men who are still idle, it would not be outside the realm of possibility to find a solution to the problem. As Deputy O'Donnell wishes to speak, I shall give way to him.
My contribution will be brief. In this House we pay considerable lip service to the Irish language and to the Gaeltacht. We boast of what we are doing to preserve the Gaeltacht and give employment in it. In Meevagh, there is the only boatyard in the Fíor-Ghaeltacht and 14 Irish-speaking families are getting a living from it. This is the boatyard selected by the Parliamentary Secretary for closing. It is not the first time it was closed. As Deputy Harte said, it was closed in 1947 and reopened by Deputy Dillon in 1948 and the Parliamentary Secretary is about to close it again. Why does he not come straight out and say that Meevagh boatyard in the Fíor-Ghaeltacht will be the last to be closed? That is what we want him to say. If he does so, we shall be quite satisfied.
Recently a boat within a radius of 13 miles of Meevagh lost its propeller while seine net fishing and as a result it was tied up for four months at the pier in Burtonport and the crew left idle simply because the propeller could not be procured. If Meevagh were in full production and carrying spare parts, the propeller could have been provided in 48 hours for this boat, the property of Mr. John McGinley. Incidentally, it was a boat issued under Deputy Dillon's scheme for the issue of boats without deposit to Gaeltacht fishermen. It is the only one I know of issued in Donegal to an Irish-speaking fisherman without a deposit and it is still the property of the Board. It was allowed to lie at Burtonport for four months, simply because the propeller could not be obtained.
We know that if you order a boat from McDonnell or Tyrrells, there is a delay of at least 18 months before the boat is available. Yet we are closing this boatyard in the centre of the fishing industry and the centre of the Gaeltacht. Why? Because it is not the policy of the Minister to keep these small yards open.
The Minister gave an undertaking some time ago that the last man into the yard would be the first out. He gave that undertaking in a letter to the Minister for Local Government. I know an employee of Meevagh boatyard who went to work there in 1950. He received his notice to quit this year and when he asked for his certificate of service, he was given a certificate from 1956 to 1963. Why did they not give him a true certificate from 1950 to 1963, in which case he would have been the last out instead of the first? I should like the Minister to explain that in the light of the undertaking he gave the Minister for Local Government that the first in would be the last out. I cannot name him obviously but he resides at Rossapenna Cottages at Downings. Why was he given this certificate? It was an excuse to get rid of him because he kicked with the wrong foot, because his politics were not the right brand for the Parliamentary Secretary.
There is no need to make any apology for general fisheries policy at present. Substantial grants have been introduced under the Programme for Sea Fisheries Development announced in the White Paper last April 12 months. These grants have been instituted by the Fianna Fáil Government. It was a Fianna Fáil Government who first introduced the principle of giving grants to enable fishermen to purchase new boats at reasonable cost——
The old Sea Fisheries Association did that.
——purchased at 25 per cent of the cost together with a 10 per cent incentive grant in the event of repayment being effected within ten years on the hire purchase loan. Hire purchase commitments have now been reduced to a rate of 4 per cent per annum and the facilities now apply also to secondhand boats. The net effect has been to increase the catching power of the Irish fleet and this is the main purpose of fisheries policy at the moment.
Even at the expense of putting men out of work, you will buy secondhand boats in Britain.
The important thing is to increase the catch of fish and land more fish.
And you do that by putting men out of work.
Surely the Parliamentary Secretary is entitled to speak without interruption?
The direct result of this constructive policy has been that in the present year, month in and month out, landings have been running 20 per cent ahead of what they were for the corresponding months last year. This has been the most progressive leap forward in sea fishery landing since the formation of this State. They are running 20 per cent per month higher.
Is that in sterling value or in weight?
Value and volume, a little bit ahead in value, but in the region of 20 per cent. Largely, this has been because we have succeeded through (a) the policy of grants and loans towards the purchase of new boats and (b) the policy of making the loan facilities, with their reduced interest rate, available for the purchase of secondhand boats, we have succeeded in increasing the catching power of the fleet. Indeed, the boats which have been purchased on the secondhand market abroad are boats that could not have been constructed in any Irish boatyard and they have enabled high-powered vessels to be put in the hands of Irish skippers, thereby considerably increasing the catching power. Killybegs has been in the forefront of this policy of having high-powered vessels.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary serious when he says Irish boat-builders are inferior to foreign boat-builders?
I did not say any such thing. I said the secondhand vessels in respect of which hire purchase facilities were made available by An Bord Iascaigh Mhara were large vessels in excess of the limit to which Irish boatyards are geared; they are in excess of 65 feet.
Is that the fault of the workmen or the Board?
The Deputy had 20 minutes. Now he does not want to allow the Parliamentary Secretary ten minutes. The Deputy will not allow the Parliamentary Secretary to speak.
On a point of order——
It is not a point of order. The Deputy will resume his seat.
Coming back to the particular issue concerning Meevagh boatyard——
That is what I asked about.
——I am anxious to get down to the specific issue, although the debate was enlarged by both Deputy Harte and Deputy O'Donnell, and that is why I made my preliminary specific remarks. Coming now to Meevagh boatyard, the situation that has faced An Bord Iascaigh Mhara here is one in which there was a walk-out by the employees in Meevagh boatyard actually at a time when there was a vessel in course of construction in the yard, a vessel that would have provided work for some time ahead. The issue is as simple as that. Indeed the trade union concerned, the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union, at all stages had detailed discussions with the officers of An Bord Iascaigh Mhara who travelled down to Meevagh on several occasions for these discussions, not alone with the men but with the local branch secretary of the union. The Board reached agreement on a rota basis on which the men would be employed. There was not enough work on hand to employ the 13 men there but a rota basis was agreed on as being suitable, between the officers of the Board and the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union. The men concerned repudiated this agreement and, despite the very strong advice given to them by the local branch secretary of the trade union, a total walkout was organised by the men concerned and there the position stands.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary agree or disagree with their decision?
That is not for me.
The Deputy will cease interrupting.
I should like to emphasise that, in so far as I can assist in the situation, I would abide by the decision of the trade union and the branch secretary of the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union appointed by the men to look after their iterests and negotiate on their behalf with An Bord Iascaigh Mhara.
Would you not listen to the Minister for Local Government?
Order.
The union concerned adopted a very responsible attitude in this matter but their advice was apparently ignored and the situation now is that, following a walk-out while work was still in progress at the yard, work has not been resumed, for the simple reason that the men concerned have not resumed work. The position was left open for some time. The boat which was in course of construction was there available and work could have been resumed by the people who walked out, but that was not done. Reluctantly then, after a period of time, it was decided to remove the boat to Baltimore boatyard for completion and that, in fact, has been done.
You now intend to close the yard.
The functions of the Board in the matter will be governed entirely by the circumstances of the situation and the basic circumstance at the moment is that the staff concerned have walked out, contrary to the advice of their trade union. I still maintain, as I have suggested to the Minister for Local Government by correspondence, and statements here in the House, that, in the event of orders coming along, these orders would be utilised in Meevagh boatyard.In fact, one such order relating to one boat was halfway through the course of construction when this walk-out took place. Any such suitable orders could be channelled to Meevagh boatyard if there were men available to carry out the work.
The men are available if you will give them the work.
Contrary to the advice of their own trade union, the men took unofficial action. That is the nub of the whole matter. There is no question of this matter concerning an unofficial walkout action being lifted into a general indictment of the fishing industry.Any such attempt is fraudulent. As I said, the industry at the moment is doing very well, thanks to a positive Government policy, which has provided grants and incentives to our fishermen to buy new and secondhand boats, Government policy which has decided to concentrate on major fishery harbours around the coast, one of which is in County Donegal.
That will not feed the families of the boat-builders in Meevagh.
Apparently the Deputy does not want to hear the Parliamentary Secretary.
One of those major harbours, Killybegs in County Donegal, is in the forefront.
The Parliamentary Secretary has not answered my question in the last ten minutes.
If the Deputy does not cease interrupting, I shall ask him to leave the House.
One of those major harbours is Killybegs in Donegal. It is in the forefront of this fisheries expansion and I should like to take this occasion to congratulate the fishermen and skippers in Killybegs for their enterprise, foresight and capacity for hard work which has succeeded in turning Killybegs into the premier fishing port in the country. We have given help to enable this to come about and the Government have made available shore facilities——
Tell us about Meevagh.
——which will provide for an expansion of the industry there.
Did your predecessor not want to buy foreign trawlers?
We are talking about 1963.
(Interruptions.)
The fishmeal factory and the fish processing factory in Killybegs are both expanding.
Set up by Deputy Dillon.
I should like Deputies opposite to keep the total picture in mind and to remember that particular instances cannot be used as an indication of the general state of a thriving industry, which is the position at the moment. In particular, the instance quoted here by Deputy Harte in regard to Meevagh boatyard is one in which the Government's hands and the hands of An Bord Iascaigh Mhara and of the trade union concerned are absolutely clean.
And the hands of the clock.
The Dáil adjourned at 11 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 14th November, 1963.