Committee on Finance. - Vote 41—Transport and Power (Resumed). – Dáil Éireann (18th Dáil) – Thursday, 9 Nov 1967

Committee on Finance. - Vote 41—Transport and Power (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:

That the Vote be referred back for consideration. —(Deputy Cosgrave.)

Mr. Dillon

I join in the Minister's congratulations to Bord Fáilte. Secondly, I should like to refer to the work of the Inland Fisheries Trust. Reference was made to the importance of fishing to our tourist industry as a whole, and I have in my hand a booklet produced by the Irish Inland Waterways Association called Cruising on the Grand Canal. It is very attractively produced and draws special attention to the coarse fishing amenities there and, on certain stretches, to the trout fishing amenities available. I hope the Minister will have this document constantly present in his mind when considering the conspiracy of certain people, sustained and promoted by Deputy Noel Lemass, to close down the canal throughout the city and substitute for it an open sewer covered by a motorway. The decision to permit even the temporary closing of the canal for the purpose of laying a sewer at the bottom is a great mistake, but I do not estimate being personally intimately concerned with the ultimate fate of the canal because I expect at that time to constitute part of mother earth; but for the sake of posterity I say that if this conspiracy, initiated by the municipal authorities in Dublin, is allowed to proceed the citizens of Dublin will be denied the amenity the canal provides for them and the whole country will suffer proportionately by the abridgment of the amenity which the canal provides down through those areas where there are so few other tourist attractions.

I am glad to see that in recent times the work of the Inland Fisheries Trust is being more fully valued and appreciated than it was in days of yore. They are doing work of incalculable value and I am glad they are getting the help they have been receiving in recent times from Bord Fáilte. I rejoice in the somewhat more generous fund being made available for the work they have to do.

I want to emphasise to the House a fact which is frequently overlooked. The work of the Inland Fisheries Trust is a long-time job and, very frequently, it is valuable work. It does not produce results for three or four years. The work is done and then two or three years elapse before results manifest themselves. In the interval, every hog, dog and devil on the roads of Ireland writes to the Minister and says: "They have ruined the lough or the river on which they have been working." But, when the fruit of their labour comes to manifest itself, neither hog, dog nor devil writes to say: "I made a fool of myself when I wrote to the paper two or three years ago."

The classical case of that is Lough Sheelin in County Cavan. I remember when I was dealing with Lough Sheelin. It was a very difficult case. The Inland Fisheries Trust then had exiguous funds. They did a superb job on one of the greatest trout lakes in Europe. Every pest and every man who looked like a woman and every woman who looked like a man wrote to the paper and said it was a public scandal that money should be used to destroy a lake such as Lough Sheelin. A period of four or five years has now elapsed and everybody can now see the fruits of the labours of the Inland Fisheries Trust on that lake. Some of them even have the impudence to tell me about their marvellous catches on Lough Sheelin but they get very dusty answers from me when I remember the letters they wrote to the papers on the subject a few years ago. I hope the Minister will be vigilant to see that, if the Inland Fisheries Trust are slandered while their work is awaiting manifest benefit, he will remind those who are inclined to be critical that it is of the very nature of their being that what they do this year may not show its fruits until 1970 or 1972.

I have spoken about my concern for the canal. I want to say this further word in regard to it. There is no use in telling us that Dublin Corporation are going to go down the canal with a toothpick in order to excavate the sites in the bottom of the canal for a sewerage pipe and a drainage space. Once they get into the canal, they will start sailing through with huge machinery and the next performance will be that we shall be told that all the trees on both sides of the canal will have to be removed in order to allow the machinery to fulfil its function. I trust the Minister for Transport and Power will be utterly adamant in his prohibition of any such outrage of this precious amenity in the city of Dublin.

I now turn to something in respect of which the Minister will need to approach a colleague, or possibly the Revenue Commissioners, through the Minister for Finance, that is, the operation of the customs officers at ports of entry. The first person a tourist meets when he arrives in Ireland is the customs officer. It is surprising how many people, visiting the country, get their first and ineradicable impression of the country from the reception they get at the customs barrier. There is no use in our pretending that the job of a preventive officer is easy: it is not. If only people would act reasonably we should have no trouble at all in getting the work done with expedition.

Everybody can bring in £5 worth of stuff if he declares it. The customs officers will be delighted to take a liberal view of a lady's dressinggown or nightgown if she declares it. If she tells him what she paid for it and asks him what it is worth he may say: "It is not worth it." It is the person who has something at the bottom of her bag and who protests loudly when she is asked to open it who creates the trouble. It is very difficult. I have observed the officers operating and, on the whole, I have got the impression that the experienced male preventive officers, acting under the chief preventive officer, act reasonably and prudently.

For some strange reason, if you take a nice girl and put her into a preventive officer's uniform, she suddenly turns into a Gorgon. They advance on me and they put the heart across me—the very appearance of them. So far as I know, when they change out of the uniform into their ordinary everyday clothes, and go off duty, they are as nice as girls can be. Why can somebody not say to them: "There is no need to look fierce. You can act fierce, if it is necessary to do so, but have a smile while you are doing it. It is just as easy to examine a passenger's luggage with a smile and sympathy as it is to do so looking like a Gorgon."

I like to have an opportunity to pay tribute to public servants, where opportunity presents itself, but there is no doubt that this is creating somewhat of a problem at the ports of entry. I suggest that the Minister should seek the collaboration of the Revenue Commissioners in attempting to school their preventive officers, with this in mind. When, many years ago, I went to serve my time in the distributive trade, both in London and Chicago, we were not allowed to meet a customer for a month after we went into these big distributive houses because they spent a month teaching us how to deal with difficult customers. I remember old ladies who used to get out expensive ball gowns on approbation and bring them back the next day and you could judge that they had worn them the night before. You were obliged to handle that situation with tact and discretion. I remember one old gentleman in the basement whom we would dismiss in the presence of an irate customer and later he would return to the basement. It was his duty to be sacrificed to the fury of an incensed customer.

Every tourist coming into this country is a potential customer. I do not say that we should have a reserve preventive officer whom we could dismiss from time to time in order to appease an unreasonable tourist. I am only explaining the precautions that, in mercantile life, are taken to train staff to deal sympathetically with potential customers. I do not think it appropriate that a preventive officer should be required to go to the lengths we were taught to go in the distributive trade. I do not think it reasonable to suggest that anybody, however well-trained, can discharge the disagreeable duty of a preventive officer to the satisfaction of every one. However, I do think that it is very important to persuade them to look pleasant and to discharge their duties cheerfully, bearing in mind that most or a very high per centage of tourists travelling abroad for the first time in their lives are nervous and excitable and will always remember if they are kindly received at the customs. But they will also remember if they are not treated properly or in a way they believe to be unsympathetic.

Now to move from the customs barrier to ancient monuments. Bord Fáilte have in a number of cases erected explanatory plaques on ancient monuments. There is an abbey on the road to Carrick-on-Suir if you are coming from Waterford to Clonmel. I forget the name but the Minister knows it as well as I do.

Mr. Childers

Is it Jerpoint?

Mr. Dillon

Yes. There I can find a plaque put up by Bord Fáilte which contains an interesting short summary of the history of the abbey. I read it with great interest, and I am sure strangers would read it with even greater interest, but there are any number of these ancient monuments which have their names given by the Tourist Board and I would suggest to the Minister that a great many tourists would greatly appreciate if an explanatory plaque such as that on Jerpoint Abbey could be provided on them, on the monuments which the Tourist Board already consider to be of sufficient importance to justify a description in a more cursory fashion.

I have got the figures wrong. Perhaps the Minister would look at his manuscript and see if there is not some ambiguity there. There is nothing more important, when you have said all you want to say, than to say no more. Since we are not, I think, taking with this Vote the vote for Posts and Telegraphs I shall conclude.

Mr. Treacy

We have had a detailed exposition of the responsibilities attached to the Minister's post and I think it is only fair to compliment him on the facts and figures he has given us and on the detailed research which obviously went into his speech. The Minister dealt first with CIE and again was critical about the way in which CIE are operating. It is disconcerting to realise that they had a deficit this year of £2 million. The Minister attributed this substantial loss to a number of factors, mainly the incidence of strikes—the strike here amongst our own transport workers, the British seamen's strike and the American airlines strike. At least, it is good to know that strikes are not confined to the mere Irish and that some of the losses sustained were attributable to strikes elsewhere.

The Minister glossed over rather quickly, and without due credit to the employees involved, the fact that in the past year an increase in productivity of some 12 per cent was achieved. The workers concerned are to be congratulated on this very considerable increase. There are other commendable aspects of CIE. There was an increase in the rail passenger section of some 6 per cent and in the rail merchandise section of 5.8 per cent. Many of us feel more could be done to attract more passengers to CIE, particularly on the railway, and more merchandise if prices could be reduced. We appreciate that CIE are competing against a growing number of private cars every year. We are told that the number of private cars has increased by 75 per cent to 296,000 at present. By 1975 it is estimated there will be some 600,000 private cars in this country. I believe many of the users of private cars would avail of CIE rail travel if the fares were somewhat cheaper.

Much could be done to eliminate the confusion and reduce the death hazard on our roads if the Minister adopted a policy of enticing people to utilise CIE rail travel, in particular. The most effective way he can do this is to keep the fares as low as possible. Many people regard the fares for bus and rail travel in this country as pretty high, even by British or continental standards. If these charges were reduced we believe much could be done to entice people to avail of rail travel and to have their goods conveyed by rail.

The cost of travel in provincial districts is regarded as excessively high, and it is no wonder that in respect of bus services in the provincial areas CIE receipts last year increased by £97,000. It must be disconcerting in the extreme for the Minister and, indeed, for all of us to realise that 80 per cent of the goods which are transported in this country today are carried on own account, that is, I imagine, the goods are transported by the companies themselves who either produce or distribute the goods concerned. The remaining 20 per cent is shared by CIE and the licensed hauliers. Surely something should be done to get a better share than 20 per cent of the goods that are transported. There is obviously something fundamentally wrong with the State's transport system, either excessive charges for the transport of goods or some other deficiency, when we find 80 per cent of the goods in this country being transported via other means. We are entitled to ask why such a high percentage of goods is transported by companies' own vehicles rather than by CIE. As I said earlier, very much could be done to eliminate bottlenecks on our roads and to reduce the incidence of accidents and death on our roads if the rail service were utilised to the maximum capacity. From the figures available to us, that most certainly is not happening at the present time.

Other Deputies have once again adverted to the workers in CIE, particularly the retired workers. I want to lend my voice to those others who are pleading here for a better deal for the CIE pensioner. Of all the pensioners in this country that we have come to know I think it is true to say that the CIE pensioners, especially the older men who are on retirement for a number of years, are the worst off. They have the worst pensions of all. From time to time when we have adverted to this matter and the injustice to CIE pensioners, the Minister, in computing the pensions concerned, has taken into account the social welfare pensions to which these people are normally entitled by way of old age pension or disability benefit or the like. We have always contended that this was a most unfair way of looking at the problem, that the old age pension is something they would have secured in the ordinary way, something to which they had contributed over their working life, and that it was wrong to reckon the old age pension in determining the pensions CIE would pay. There are not very many of these pensioners of late, and I would appeal to the Minister to review the situation, to have regard to the steep increase in the cost of living which has taken place since they were last adjusted, and to take urgent steps to increase the pensions of these CIE pensioners.

The Minister is responsible for a number of State agencies: CIE, the British and Irish Steampacket Company, Aer Lingus, Aerlínte, Bord na Móna, ESB, et cetera. We in the Labour Party are anxious to see that these State industries, which are giving such valuable employment and providing such an essential service for our people, would grow and prosper and that nothing would be said or done to harm or impede that progress. Our only regret is that the Government is not embarking upon more State enterprises of this kind where it can be clearly seen that private enterprise is either unable or unwilling to do the job and to provide opportunities for our people to be put to productive work.

While we have a very high incidence of unemployment and emigration, we have always contended there is a moral responsibility on the State to become more and more involved in State enterprises of this kind, to utilise the full resources of our nation in putting people to work. That is why we value highly the work carried out by the ESB in providing light and power for our people, and work carried out on our bogs by Bord na Móna, and indeed the work of CIE, which we have always maintained was an essential public service and should not be looked upon merely as an enterprise which should show a profit. The service which it provides is valuable whether or not it shows a profit.

I should like the Minister to indicate to us in his concluding remarks what the position is about the improvement we have called for from time to time in this House in respect of the passenger service between Rosslare and Fishguard and between Dún Laoghaire and Holyhead. There still are complaints being made about the conditions which passengers have to endure in travelling on these boats from here to Britain, and I should be glad if the Minister would allay anxiety in that regard. The commendable progress being made by the B & I Steampacket Company is amply reflected in the profit they have made in the last financial year of some £86,000. The Department and the B & I are to be heartily congratulated on that achievement and we would hope for a continuation of that progress.

Irish Shipping were not so fortunate on this occasion and this year at least the tendency would seem to be towards a loss. However, there have been commendable achievements as is evident in respect of the provision of the car ferry service which has been in operation for some time and which will achieve greater importance in the years to come through the operation of the Continental car ferry service.

As a Deputy from the south-eastern regional tourist area, I was particularly gratified to learn that the Continental car ferry service will be situated at Rosslare and will operate between Rosslare and Le Havre. For a while there was some anxiety as to the outcome of this venture. There was reason to believe that very great influence was being brought to bear on the Departments concerned to locate this Continental car ferry service elsewhere but the valid grounds on which Rosslare made its claim eventually won out on merit alone. I believe that the Continental car ferry service will be an invaluable boost to tourism in the whole of the south-eastern tourist region. Instead of tourists being directed to certain recognised tourist areas, we envisage thousands of passengers from the Continent embarking at Rosslare and spreading out and being diffused throughout the counties of Wexford. Carlow, Kilkenny, Tipperary and Waterford, to the very considerable benefit of the people in this area.

I was pleased to observe the anxiety of the Minister in respect of the threat of oil pollution. The disaster of the Torrey Canyon and the ravages wreaked on the beaches of England and parts of France horrified people in this island of ours who feared that our beaches were also in danger. It is only right and proper that the Minister for Transport and Power should take every possible precaution to ensure that oil pollution does not affect our beaches. Such an occurrence would have disastrous consequences for seaside towns which depend on tourism for their existence. I re-echo the fears expressed by Deputy Dillon in respect of the huge tankers which will be operating at Whitegate and which might constitute a very serious threat to the beaches along the south-west coast, the loveliest beaches, perhaps, in Ireland. The most beautiful part of our country is Bantry Bay and it would be a great tragedy if through inaction on the part of the Minister the beaches in that area became polluted with oil from the tankers.

I was particularly pleased to see that Waterford Harbour has not been forgotten in respect of the development of sea ports and that a grant of £260,000 has been approved for the development of Waterford Harbour as a deep-sea port and that a loan from the Local Loans Fund of a further £370,000 is being made available to the harbour authorities. The total cost of the development of Waterford Harbour as a deep-sea port is estimated at £730,000.

The Minister is to be thanked and congratulated on the interest he has displayed in that area. This development will resound to the prosperity of the people in the vast hinterland around Waterford of which South Tipperary, my constituency, is an integral part. It will do much to facilitate increased productivity and reduce costs and should prove a boon to the industrial estate at Waterford which is rapidly developing.

I trust that the plans for decasualisation which are under way in respect of the workers at Waterford Harbour will be carried through with the least possible friction and unrest on the part of the men concerned. An end to casual labour on the docks is something to which the unions and the men have looked forward for a long number of years. It is only right that these men should be given some semblance of security in employment. There have been the unhappy events in recent months in respect of the decasualisation across the water for which Labour and the trade union movement had fought for years but it took quite a lot of industrial unrest before the matter was resolved to the satisfaction of many of the dockers concerned.

I hope therefore that a lesson will have been learned from that, and that an endeavour will be made, in the first instance, to ensure that there will be no redundancy resulting from decasualisation, and that at least every possible effort will be made to ensure that no man is disemployed as a result of bringing to an end this haphazard and insecure means of livelihood known as decasualisation.

The Minister referred to the extra planes he intends to procure for Aer Lingus. I should like the Minister to tell the House the cost of these new Jumbo Jets which he intends to procure. Here again, I should like to pay tribute to our airlines for the safe and regular air transport they provide for so many thousands of people. All who have ever travelled by Aer Lingus have been glowing in their praise of the courtesy and efficiency of that company. Long may they maintain those high standards in the safe and regular and reasonably priced air transport which has been provided up to now by our air companies.

It is pleasing to realise that the Shannon Airport industrial estate is still progressing satisfactorily. The Minister indicated that eight new industries were established there in 1966-67. He also gave us the saddening news that two factories ceased operating during that period. I submit that two factories out of eight is a pretty high proportion of industrial disaster at the Shannon free estate. It is indicative of the views we have so often expressed from these benches that more care should be taken by the responsible Government agencies in vetting the people who come to establish industries with us. An effort should be made to ensure that the industries are worthwhile and have some semblance of continuity and permanency before pretty lavish State grants are expended on them.

The Minister should also admonish these potential employers, especially those coming to Shannon, that there are certain obligations on them in respect of the treatment of their workers, and on coming here, they should be dissuaded from the notion, which many of them have, that cheap labour is available in this country, and also of the notion that they can treat the trade unions as being of no account. Those of us who have any association with certain companies at Shannon— and Deputy Mullen may have dealt with this matter before me today— have sensed an anti-trade union attitude on the part of the employers at Shannon.

For some time, we were not at all happy about the conditions and wages and attitude adopted by some of those employers of our people at the Shannon free estate. Some of the propaganda of Bord Fáilte and other Government agencies, especially those agencies which are attracting industry to us, have conveyed the impression abroad that cheap labour is readily available in Ireland. It is only right that those people should be told by the Minister and the Government that when they establish industry here, at least two things are required of them: that they will pay decent wages and adhere to fair conditions of employment, and that trade unionism is a recognised and essential part of our way of life and something which should not be opposed.

I was particularly pleased to read the unqualified assurance contained in the Minister's statement this morning that the Government have no intention of acceding to the request of the United States to overfly Shannon Airport, that it is the intention of the Government to give priority to Shannon and to the western tourist area, and the assurance that Shannon must be regarded now and in the future as Ireland's only transatlantic airway. This will allay very many of the fears of the people in this whole region. The Minister is to be congratulated on standing up to the Americans and pointing out the social conditions we have attained and making bold our claim and our right to determine at what places aeroplanes or air transport will come in and go out of this country.

I want to refer briefly to tourism, which was commented upon in some detail by the Minister this morning. It is pleasing to note that extra money will be made available again this year for tourism. Some £3½ million extra is being provided this year for this vitally important industry of ours. It is also gratifying to see increased grants for hotels for the provision of extra rooms. I observe that most of the extra helps and State aid are directed towards the western regions, the west of Ireland, where they can now secure some 35 per cent of the cost of new hotels, and 50 per cent of the cost of new bedrooms. I do not begrude these extra concessions to the people in the West, but it is only fair that I should point out that I know towns and villages, and sections of our people — workers, businessmen, hoteliers, farmers—just as badly off as is the West and it is my hope that the Minister will see his way to extending these additional aids to hoteliers and guesthouse proprietors in my constituency of South Tipperary and that part of West Waterford which I have the honour to represent.

The Minister gave certain reasons as to why tourism suffered a setback, a serious set back, in 1966. For the first time in ten years, the numbers of tourists coming into the country fell considerably. The Minister advanced certain theories, some of them probably valid, in explanation of that situation. It is my personal belief that the biggest contributory factor to the falling-off in tourism is the high charges for hotel accommodation and meals. The Minister sought to defend these charges by quoting from articles in foreign papers in which comparisons were made between various countries and Ireland. Ireland came out pretty favourably, but the fact remains that gross overcharging is rife in certain hotels and guesthouses, especially during the peak summer season. Many British working-class families, upon whom we depend in the main, have been staggered by the charges for hotel accommodation and meals. They were struck dumb when they saw the bill at the end of the week in many of our hotels.

It is the avaricious hotelier who is responsible, in the main, for the fallingoff in the number of tourists coming into the country. These people are killing the goose that lays the golden egg. Many tourists with whom we have discussed the situation have told us that they were so upset by the charges that they would never come back here again. There is an obligation on the Minister to ensure that tourists are not rooked. It is well known that the British working class man and woman save all the year round for a holiday. They have, as a result of saving, £x to spend on that holiday. It is hard earned money and they are not going to part with it too easily. It is patently unfair that a mean advantage should be taken of them when they come here on holiday. The Minister referred to hotel prices for bed and breakfast. The figure he mentioned was 40/-. I submit that £2 for bed and breakfast is outside the scope of the average tourist coming to this country. We must think in terms of half that amount, £1.

I should like to advert once more to the predicament of many workers employed in hotels and to express once again our grave concern over the extremely bad conditions prevailing in many of our hotels. I do not know to what extent the Minister is responsible for the expediting of the proposed legislation to deal with the situation, but I appeal to him to use his influence with his colleagues to bring forward this proposed legislation as a matter of urgency. Too many boys and girls have been for too long exploited. They are asked to work excessively long hours, virtually night and day, Sunday and Monday, for miserly wages. It is time this exploitation was stopped. I appreciate this is very largely the function of trade unions but the hotels which offend are in rural areas and it is difficult to organise workers in rural areas, where the exploitation is worst. Many of the vocational education committees with which we are associated have expressed their anxiety at the reports of exploitation of young boys and girls who were sent away on courses and who qualified in these courses. The treatment meted out to these people in certain of our hotels leaves a great deal to be desired. I plead now for the speedy introduction of a positive code of legislation governing the wages and conditions of workers engaged in the hotel industry, so that once and for all the exploitation which so many of us know to have gone on for so long shall come to an end forever.

I am loth to make any disparaging remarks in respect of Bord Fáilte and what it is doing to improve every aspect of tourism. However, it has been alleged from time to time that certain towns or districts which we represent are not being properly catered for in the brochures, leaflets and tourist guides issued by Bord Fáilte. In the constituency which I represent, South Tipperary, is some of the loveliest scenery in the country. The region of the Valley of the Suir and the mountains of Sliabh na mBan, the Comeraghs, the Knockmealdowns and the like is an area which is truly beautiful and picturesque and affords every opportunity to the tourist by way of scenic beauty or recreational pursuit such as hunting, fishing, shooting, pony trekking, et cetera. It includes places of great historical importance like the Rock of Cashel, Lismore Castle and Carrick Castle and it is felt that this area has not been getting the place of importance which it should get in Board Fáilte publications.

There are certain parts of our county of particular beauty and because they are off the main roads, the main tracks and arteries of traffic, they are completely ignored, even though they are the most unspoiled and beautiful of all. I refer in particular to the Glen of Aherlow.

Mr. Childers

I think the regional tourist board will look after the Deputy's requirements with the local guides that have been produced.

Mr. Treacy

What we are complaining of is that in the main brochures issued by Bord Fáilte, certain of these areas to which I refer are seldom, if ever, mentioned. I refer to places like the Glen of Aherlow, a particularly lovely place under the Galtee Mountains. Indeed, all the Valley of the Suir up to the Vee and the Comeragh Mountain range have not been given the proper place in tourist information. It is not so long since the mayor of my native town had to protest to Bord Fáilte about its being remiss in the absence of mention of certain important places in my constituency.

I indicated earlier that I was pleased to see the Continental car ferry service being located at Rosslare and mentioned the boost this would be to the south-eastern regional area. Nevertheless, there are certain areas designated as part of the south-eastern region for tourist purposes which are not at all happy about that position. I want to draw the Minister's attention to the feelings of Tipperary Urban Council who are of the unanimous opinion that Tipperary town in particular should be included in the Limerick region rather than in the south-eastern region. The council points out that geographically the town of Tipperary is at the extreme end of the south-eastern region and is approximately 54 miles from Waterford city. On the other hand, Limerick city is only 24 miles away and the Limerick region comes to within a few miles of Tipperary town. I feel, therefore, that the wishes of Tipperary Urban Council should be met in this regard and that their desire to secede from the south-eastern region and to be merged with the Limerick region be acceded to.

Mr. James Tully

Biafra.

Mr. Treacy

The feeling of the members is that having regard to the town's proximity to Limerick, its orientation is towards that city and the Limerick region and that the town's location suggests, apart from any other interest, that its development within this region is a natural one.

It is also to be noted in respect of this plea that for a considerable time there has been daily commutation of workers to Limerick city and Shannon and an estimated population of 4,500 in the town and 12,000 in the hinterland means a considerable labour-pool within easy access. I trust, therefore, that the Minister will see the justice of the claims of Tipperary Urban Council in respect of this matter and that he will accede to their desire to be regarded in the Limerick region rather than in the south-eastern region for tourist development purposes.

I do not wish to say much in respect of the ESB mentioned in the Minister's remarks except that as yet only 87 per cent of our rural premises have been connected. This may seem a lot. It is a commendable achievement. At the same time there is a pretty big portion of our people without electric light and not the least of them are in my own constituency. I earnestly hope that the 23 per cent of our people who are still without electric current will be provided with it without further delay.

In regard to Bord na Móna, it is appreciated that its production is affected particularly by weather. Inclement weather can play havoc with production and I earnestly hope that the proposal which the Minister has for the "Foidin" method of production will bear the desired results and that it will be possible to secure the turf in wet weather as well as in fine and that by this means we may be able to provide for continuity of employment for the workers employed by the Board.

Lastly, I want to say that I was concerned about the statement contained in the Minister's speech about the production of anthracite coal. I represent a constituency which has within it very extensive mines in the vicinity of Ballingarry and there are very many hundreds of workers who for a long number of years have found secure and remunerative employment in those mines. Strong representations were made to us last year concerning the importation of anthracite coal. The Minister maintains that the production of anthracite coal is around 180,000 tons per annum and that last year particularly this proved inadequate for our home needs. There was a shortage of home supplies of what he terms "suitably graded anthracite" and this prompted the Minister and his Department to allow quite substantial imports of foreign anthracite coal.

I wish to appeal to the Minister not to allow the importation of foreign anthracite but to have regard to the welfare of the mines in Castlecomer, Ballingarry and elsewhere, and to be fully satisfied that there is need for the importation of foreign anthracite before sanctioning it. It was conveyed to me in very telling fashion that our own mines were quite capable of providing the needs of our people in respect of anthracite and that there was no justification whatsoever for the importation of anthracite on such a large scale in recent times.

The Minister would need to be wary about this reference to "suitably graded anthracite" because this could be used as a pretext to get in foreign imports of this commodity. Our obligation is to safeguard the local industry, in the first instance, and to satisfy ourselves that the shortage is true and accurate and can be fully justified before permitting the importation of anthracite. My plea, therefore, on this matter is to shelter and protect our own industry first and to be very cautious about granting the importation of this commodity, unless the Minister is fully justified that this is necessary and desirable. With those sentiments, I wish the Minister well in his endeavours to further our development in State enterprise and in that regard he can be assured of the support of this Party.

Mr. James Tully

First, I should like to join in the expression of thanks to the Minister for the trouble he and his officials went to in preparing this document. I have no objection at all to the length of it because it contains welcome information, and one thing, which is rather unusual for the Minister is that it does not contain piles of statistics, which are extremely difficult to digest. It is a well-thought-out document and I am very grateful to the Minister for making it available before this debate today and for the information contained in it. Naturally, I do not agree with all the sentiments expressed in it, but nevertheless it makes matters very much more interesting for those people who are interested in discussing certain aspects of the Minister's Department.

Having said that, I want to ask the Minister if in fact some mistake has been made in relation to the comments by Deputy Dillon, the question he asked and the reply he got, because, like him, I feel the figures which the Minister has supplied in his speech and the answer he gave here when asked the question by Deputy Dillon, do not coincide at all. I am particularly interested for a reason I will explain later. It appears that under Subhead (K1)—Shannon Free Airport Development Company Limited—there is a figure of £2,355,500 mentioned. Under K2, there are two figures. There is a figure of £130,500 and further on, there is a reference to repayable advances for houses and community services and the figure here is £1,100,000. Later on, there is State investment under the 1965 Act of £6 million share capital and there is a figure of £9,500,000. That, to me, makes £19,019,840 which is a long way from the £7 million the Minister said was in fact invested in the Shannon Industrial Estate up to date. If I am wrong, perhaps the Minister will correct me, when he is replying. These figures I have given have been gone over by me half a dozen times and that is what I come up with.

There appear to be at the present time 3,244 workers, and of those 1,908 are men. I assume the others must be women and girls. That, roughly, means that per worker, there is £5,946 odd invested.

The Minister referred to Bord na Móna and to the fact that there has been a loss this year overall after interest has been paid—not a very big figure—of £1,694,000. He also mentioned that the total loss to Bord na Móna is £4,400,000. The Minister must not be aware that Bord na Móna employs on an average over 4,000 workers. It employs up to 10,000 in the summer and no fewer than 4,000 in the winter. If we check on that, we find that it is investing per worker over the past 25 years a sum of £821, which is a relatively small sum, in view of the fact that those people have been getting relatively decent wages and are spending that money in the State.

I mention this particularly, and I have taken it up particularly, because I feel that what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. I have no objection at all to the investment of money in the Shannon Free Airport Development Company and no objection to the spending of this money, provided good employment is given and we are building up our exports. In the case of Bord na Móna, we have an area where no employment was possible, except casual road work, and where the State set up as a semi-State company a certain industry which is working off the country, off the peat bogs and giving good wages where they are very badly needed.

It is suggested in the Minister's statement that because of the fact that there is a slight loss, it is under review by the Department of Finance at the present time. I should like to warn the Minister that if by that he means that it is proposed to do anything towards curtailing that employment, it will seriously be opposed in this House.

There is another point which Deputy Dillon mentioned and to which I should like to refer briefly. It is the question of the ESB and the Bord na Móna fuel. Bord na Móna, and I am quite sure of this, have supplied fuel to the ESB at slightly over one-half production cost. This information came out at a public inquiry which was held some time ago on the question of the 7 per cent increase. If that is so I can see no reason why we should have the situation where, in fact, the ESB is being subsidised by Bord na Móna.

Mr. Childers

They may have supplied at half the cost. Because the weather was so bad they did not reach the target. They supply turf to the ESB which should if the season is good just cover the cost.

Mr. James Tully

The price to the ESB has been cut and it represents roughly over one-half the cost. That is the evidence of this tribunal and we cannot get away from that. We sometimes hear that these fellows get high wages. They get a fairly reasonable wage but I believe they are, in fact, by their labour subsidising the ESB because the ESB are getting the turf cheaper than they should. In view of the statement made about a review of the whole position of Bord na Móna this is a matter worthy of comment.

I think it was yesterday I commented on peat briquettes. Somebody suggested that because of bad weather there was a shortage of peat briquettes this year. Perhaps the Minister in his reply would give the information that that is not correct and that the opposite is the case. Bad weather or no bad weather there is a fairly big stockpile which is not sold despite the fact that we have been exporting some. What has happened in the meantime is that the sale of peat briquettes has dropped. They were advertised on UTV for some time and I understand there was a big market for them in Northern Ireland. Is there not a reason for the scarcity here?

With reference to the comparison between coal and oil, the figures given were .6969d for coal and oil, 1.4448d for milled peat and .398d for hydroelectric. Some people seem to forget that there is a big investment here and that the peat generating stations which were erected at a very high cost are, in fact, there and it is not possible to convert them to the use of other fuel. Therefore, they must be either written off as a loss or the use of peat must be continued in them. The point made by Deputy Gibbons was a valid one. If there was a complete close down on oil would we not be very glad to have peat-fired stations because we would be depending, except for hydro, on the production of the peat generating stations? I hope they will be kept there as long as there is fuel to use them.

There is another matter which is an old chestnut I have used on a number of occasions. It refers to Bord na Móna. With regard to casual labour, they employ people in the spring. They must work hard right through the summer and when work is scarce in that part of the country there is no work for them and they must go to the Labour Exchange, or to the county council to look for work. I ask the Minister if there is no way whereby those people can be given continuous work. Could there not be consultation between his Department and the Forestry Division of the Department of Lands for the purpose of planting trees on cutaway bogs? Surely it must be realised that if a man with a big family is laid off and is drawing unemployment benefit for the entire slack period very often the State is responsible for paying him as much as he would get if he were working a full week. He would be far happier working a full week and surely it is not beyond the competence or ability of the two Departments concerned to see whether there is any way whereby manpower can be utilised which would not cost as much as appears at first glance. Something should be done about this.

The ESB charges have been mentioned here and this again is something which I have raised on a number of occasions. The rural charges are fairly high; the special charges are for people, not as Deputy Treacy said who are living on the side of a mountain, but for people in the middle of County Meath. If there is a more accessible part of the country than County Meath I should like to see it. People within a few hundred yards of the line are told that they cannot get a supply unless they pay the special charge. The sooner this is changed the better for all concerned. I know that an effort has been made over the last 12 months and that the Minister promised that he would make money available which would allow wired houses to be connected within a certain period. But for that, areas which should have been connected many years ago could have been left for a long time. The Minister should ask the ESB to have another look at this. I think that it may not be possible to connect all the 15 per cent figure suggested. Included in that 15 per cent are numerous houses, and even villages, which are within striking distance of supply lines and most certainly within a few hundred yards of the ESB lines. There is no reason why they should not be entitled to get current at a reasonable financial charge.

With reference to the question of tourism, I have recently been appointed to the Eastern Regional Tourist Board. I only had an opportunity to attend one meeting but one of the things that struck me immediately was that there seems to be a great shortage of money to do the things which should be done. Some of the things which have been suggested to the Board as a way of raising funds certainly would not commend themselves to me. They are the sort of things discussed on the Late Late Show. I do not think that that is the proper way to finance something like the Tourist Board which is attempting to do a good job. The area covering the eastern region is too big. It starts at Wicklow and runs on to Louth. The great snag is that as in other areas the major tourist resorts are those which get the attention. I am as interested in this as is the Minister because I live in a minor tourist resort. I live in a seaside resort and we have been almost completely neglected by the Tourist Board over the years. Two years ago a local committee was formed to try to develop the area. With the co-operation of the local people a big effort has been made. A brochure has been prepared and 10,000 copies distributed all over the world. This year, though we have heard complaints from similar areas about falling off in tourists, we got them. However, I am sorry to say that because we have not received much co-operation and little or no financial support from the Tourist Board, we were not as well prepared to deal with those tourists as we might have been. The best we could do was get people in the area to turn their houses into guesthouses for bed and breakfast purposes. This was tried effectively.

Mr. Childers

Good.

Mr. James Tully

We have seven miles of safe beach. I heard people talking about the wonderful scenic areas and the wonderful beaches they have but I challenge anybody to rival the beach I am speaking about. The smallest child can walk along it for miles because the tide goes back one and a half miles, comes in gently and the water depth is never such as to do any harm to anybody.

This has not been receiving the attention it should be getting from the Tourist Board and though thousands of pounds have been spent in tourist areas, in seaside towns, which have already built up their facilities from grants and so on, places like mine have been so badly neglected that the people are discouraged. The local authority have helped as far as they can but there is a limit to what the ratepayers are prepared to pay to have these amenities supplied.

The Tourist Board should now reverse their policy of continuously spending money in the big areas and try to do something for the small areas. If they do, I can promise them the results will be astounding. I have given the Minister the experience we have had of our small effort. We propose to keep it up, but if we get some financial assistance, we should be able to build up the entire area.

In practically every one of the small tourist areas, on Sundays in the summer and on weekdays, people who come to stay for weeks on end discover when they go outside the houses in which they stay that there are no public conveniences of any kind. We can understand that, but people who come from outside do not. They can walk for miles and miles, pass hundreds of people but can find no sanitary facilities between Bettystown and Laytown. This is one of the problems that should be looked at by the Tourist Board.

There is the equally important problem of the provision of mid-day meals. One can go to the west of Ireland, to Galway or elsewhere, and find that every second house provides only bed and breakfast accommodation. That is all right in such places but the big snag in the smaller tourist areas is the difficulty of getting midday or evening meals. In these circumstances, the Minister should consider giving some assistance, not to hotels—I agree with Deputy Mullen that the plans to build more and more bigger hotels in Dublin is being grossly overdone — but some assistance to restaurants where people can get meals. It can be done and it is an amenity which is badly required in many places. The Minister should consider it and I am quite sure he will find plenty of evidence to show it is desirable.

Signposts were mentioned. Perhaps the Minister and others will not agree with me but I find a prevalence of dirty signposts throughout the country. The poles may be painted but nobody ever seems to think of keeping them clean. It shocks people to find, even coming to towns which have won the Tidy Towns Competition, dirty advance notices. I know this is not a matter for the Minister's Department or for the tourist organisation but the Minister might pass the suggestion along that signposts and advance notices should be kept clean.

Reference was made to overcharging. It is quite true that the Financial Times produced statistics to prove that meals here in a certain type of hotel are cheaper than elsewhere. All of us who have been out of the country know that it depends on where you go. If the cost of living and the standard of living are high in some countries, the cost of meals is high and we have got to accept it. If we go to a place where the standard of living is low, it is possible to buy a meal cheaply. However, I should not like anybody to get the impression here that all hotels and restaurants charge fair prices for meals.

It is true that throughout the country there are people who are doing irreparable harm to the tourist industry because not alone are they overcharging but the service is bad. Matters are worse if one is not from the town in which one is dining. It is a bit thick to go into one of these places and get an indifferent meal badly served. The unfortunate thing about a number of such places is that the hoteliers get two or three girls who are working through their holiday period to earn their school fees and they dump these unfortunate girls into the dining rooms where they charge for first-class service.

These people either should have staff properly trained or scale down their charges. No matter what the hotel is like—it may be carpeted from wall to wall—in many cases the meals are badly served and the prices are out of all proportion to the value. This may not be the experience of the Minister or some of the officials of his Department, who might be recognised, but ordinary people going around the country, as I do and as a number of other Deputies do, go into hotels where the charges for meals are skyhigh and the meals indifferent.

I am not impressed by letters in the newspapers. They are usually written for a different reason. There have been several letters complaining about charges but I am speaking from personal experience and I am sure there are quite a number of Deputies who have had similar experiences. On the other hand, there are hundreds, possibly thousands of hotels, who give good meals served better than anywhere else in the world, but there is the odd one and it is that which causes the trouble. There are far too many of them; they are not playing fair and it is time they were put out of business.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.

The Dáil adjourned at 5 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 14th November. 1967.

Dáil Éireann debate - Thursday, 9 Nov 1967

Committee on Finance. - Vote 41—Transport and Power (Resumed).

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 9 Nov 1967