Before Question Time I pointed out that what was necessary was a complete review of our economic experience of the past five years and I asked that there be a reassessment of the planning procedures and the preparation of a comprehensive five-year plan to be operative from 1st January, 1973. My reason for doing that was the date of accession to the EEC.
Unless the country has clear-cut plans for adaptation and industrial development and a social programme, we will drift through the transitional period and find ourselves within the EEC even more uncertain than we are at present as regards economic development.
The necessary ingredient for the successful preparation of that kind of plan is a decision by the Cabinet to state now in 1973-78 terms the broad objectives of a socio-economic nature which must be recognised as definite commitments by the Government and by the various social partners in the Government. There is a need for adequate institutional arrangements. I would suggest a complete transition in respect of institutional arrangements particularly those relating to the IDA, to Córas Tráchtála, to the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards and the various State-sponsored bodies whose functions and objects have not been co-ordinated to bring about effective economic development.
During that period there may well be a need to establish a powerful, an efficient and a dynamic State holding corporation to assist us in the transition period and particularly to assist industries that may find themselves in severe adaptation difficulties. Above all there must be, within the Cabinet, some sort of commitment to bring about change in our own economic structure. In replies to Dáil questions and in the preparation of legislation that comes before this House there is nothing that indicates any real evidence of any deep discussion within the Cabinet on, for example, regional development or on new kinds of tax incentives that will have to be introduced when we enter the EEC. A complete change-over will be necessary in respect of export tax incentives. There is no new thinking on any of these matters. The Taoiseach is a very tired, a very confused and a very upset Corkman who is in charge of a more confused group of individuals within his Cabinet. There is no common sense of purpose in terms of economic and social strategy. This is bad for the country. Certainly, it is bad in so far as the prospects for future employment are concerned. It means that in this year we are likely to have 7,500 people unemployed as a result of redundancies in industries.
What is necessary also is the democratic involvement in economic policy by the various national voluntary organisations. I find that many employer organisations, trading organisations and trade unions within the country are by no means involved in democratic evolution of policy. It is essential that the various economic sectors and the major single industry firms, as well as the large State-sponsored enterprises in the country be fully involved, fully consulted and fully represented in the development of economic strategy in planning. So far there has been no involvement of these organisations in Government decision-making. This is a matter of profound regret and we are now seeing the results of that lack of involvement.
The overwhelming reaction that one gets from talking to any of the major State-sponsored organisations, whether they be CIE, Aer Lingus, the ESB, the Sugar Company or any other, is that they know what they would like to do. They may say that they have a five-year programme. An Foras Talúntais or the Institute of Industrial Research and Standards may say that they have a particular programme in mind but that, as soon as such a programme reaches the Cabinet, it is shoved off to the National Science Council. The general reaction from the major State-sponsored organisations is that the various Departments of State operate as autonomous entities in economic development and that there is no consultation involving these national bodies in comprehensive planning.
Such involvement is a necessity and we must have it in relation to planning in the period 1973 to 1978. Likewise, the Minister's Department must take some initiative on the introduction of industrial democracy. I suggest that, initially, they do this within the State-sponsored bodies. We have heard many pious aspirations and much window dressing from the Taoiseach regarding the need for participation and for consultation. That is all gone and the Cabinet becomes more and more introverted. The Minister for Foreign Affairs wants to run the show so far as our economic strategy is concerned in terms of admission to the EEC. The Minister for Finance blows hot and cold month by month. In the last Budget he imposed massive company taxation but three or four weeks ago that was lifted. He introduced a Prices and Incomes Bill but, again, this was dropped.
There is a need for an elementary sense of participatory democracy in the Cabinet but there is a need also to introduce industrial democracy at national level. In that regard I might give one example. This is an example that was rather berated in the House by Deputy Seán French. In respect of An Taisce Stáit I pointed out that where there were very substantial sums of money invested by the State in private companies, there should be broadly-based nominated directors to keep an eye on the taxpayers' money. I raised the matter in relation to a particular company in Cork and I pointed out that the Government had appointed four company directors. I suggested that there should be a worker representative on that board but I merely got a negative reaction from the workers concerned. From the Minister for Finance, I got an inspired reaction and, no doubt, the reaction of the Minister for Industry and Commerce would have been the same as his.
Therefore, an idea of national participation by national organisations in the Government agencies seems to have got a bad knock in recent years. I have asked also that there be an increasing attempt by the State to exercise more influence over banking and credit procedures, systems and policies. It is something of a joke that the Central Bank pronounce on high their particular version of economic policy.
The Confederation of Irish Industries follow suit, giving their interpretation. The Irish Congress of Trade Unions chase off to the Minister and the Taoiseach to give their interpretation. Finally the Minister has some kind of a reaction. There seems to be no basic cohesion and no basic system under which these organisations and the Ministers could consult rather than having the post-mortems on referenda held in the newspapers after the events.
It is a matter of profound regret that the repeated suggestions of the Labour Party that a national economic council should be set up and should be in operation by now were not adopted. The Department would be represented on that council. That council should now be debating the question of redundancy and advancing plans on policies to the Government and to the nation dealing with the question of unemployment and under-employment and the slowing down in industrial development. It has not been set up simply because, for the past three or four months, the Minister for Finance has been obdurate in trying to dictate to the trade union movement as to who they should nominate to a national economic council. The Minister should use his influence to bring the Minister for Finance to heel and he should make sure that his Department and the various organisations that consult with his Department are adequately represented on the NEC when it is set up. It should be established. It is a bit late now but better late than never.
There is an urgent need for control over the acquisition of Irish industrial enterprises by foreign groups. When the Minister promised us legislation relating to mergers I think he was talking with his tongue in his cheek. He has assured us that he will give us prices legislation and merger legislation and legislation relating to the new State company, Fóir Stáit. He hopes to have all this through the House by 16th December. Surely the Minister knows that, with the tremendous backlog of Dáil work and the large number of Bills which we have yet to get through, the likelihood of such legislation going through on this side of Christmas is rather remote.
We will find ourselves in a situation in 1972 in which the Fianna Fáil Government will propose to lead a rather stagnant and unprepared economy into the Common Market with little more protection than the kind of flimsy draft protocol which the Minister for Foreign Affairs brought back in respect of the export tax reliefs. He did not even mention the words in the protocol itself.
We demand a comprehensive public review of the state preparedness of Irish industry for entry into the EEC. I am not convinced that this is being done. If we are to enter we must prepare for it through the operation of an effective five year plan during the period of 1973 to 1978. Such a plan is quite inconceivable under Fianna Fáil rule. It is not on the cards. I do not think the Government have the capacity or the energy, or the competence to even think in those terms. They have had their chance to do so.
Through the decade from 1961 to 1971 there was a proliferation of surveys in preparation for the future. From 1961—and that is a solid ten years ago now—until 1964 we had the Committee on Industrial Organisation publishing reports on the main industrial sectors. In those reports they surveyed the problem areas in Irish industry. They made suggestions and put forward measures that should be taken to adapt to free trade conditions. Nothing happened during that period. By and large the Government did not take the necessary steps to implement effectively the many recommendations in the CIO reports. No positive programme of reorganisation and adjustment was adopted by the Government. They left each Department to get on as best they could with whatever arrangements they could make with industry.
In 1967 we had the Confederation of Irish Industries, more in desperation I think than anything else, undertaking a study of the prospects for industry generally in a free trade Europe. It published its own findings and recommended its own strategy at the time in its own publication called Challenge. In 1968 there was another proliferation of reports. I read through them. Before I came into this House I had to read them and consult the trade unions on them. If we take on the one hand the 1961 report and on the other hand the 1971 report of the CIO on the one industry, and go through the recommendations contained in those reports, we find whole areas where very little has been done by the Government. So far we have had reports on the women's outer wear industry, the tanning and dressing of leather industry, the metal trade industry, the men's outer wear industry, the paper and paper products, fruit and vegetables, hosiery and knitwear industries. We have had those reports as supplements, one might say, of the report of the CIO from 1961-1963.
One almost calls into question the purpose of going ahead with this kind of exercise. A report is published and nothing seems to happen. It is not good enough for the Minister to say: "There is not very much the Department can do. It is essentially a matter for the industries themselves. We only exhort; we only give guidance; we only try to persuade people; there is not very much more we can do beyond the publication of the reports." We must establish in Irish industry the kind of structure that will bring about the implementation of these reports. I do not think that is being done. I do not think it has been fully attempted by the Government. I appreciate that there were major difficulties. I remember that when I was in the trade union movement there were major difficulties in getting together industrial organisations to implement the recommendations in these reports on a co-operative basis.
I refer particularly to the adaptation councils and the proposals which emerged for the setting up of economic development councils for Irish industry. I accept that a great deal of bitchiness went on at the time between the interested organisations. I accept that there is an undue amount of cynicism at the idea of setting up any kind of new organisation to implement Government recommendations. I accept that a new organisation might well cut across some of the existing trade organisations. For all that, I believe that the original proposition to set up a whole range of economic development councils for industry based on a coherent national plan held out hope for the realistic implementation of the recommendations contained in those reports.
The fact that this did not happen shows the extent to which planning has fallen into disrepute. We have an ironical situation where the Confederation of Irish Industry seems to be once again rather taken up with the idea of planning. Originally it was not very co-operative in that field either with the Department of Industry and Commerce or with the Department of Finance. Now that the Confederation of Irish Industry experience, at first hand, the effects of free trade they are beginning to see the very urgent need to get together to devise some form of planning and organisational set-up which would assist industry and ensure that the opportunities open to industry will be fully availed of. Unless the Minister takes the initiative we will find in the next few years that redundancy in industry will be much more severe. It is my strong belief that this could happen unless remedial action is taken.
I was rather interested in Deputy Donegan's comments relating to the EEC and the prospects facing the Labour Party in particular in relation to the Common Market. I find myself in some agreement with what he says. The Minister devoted several pages of his speech to the prospects facing Irish industry. I would find myself saying bluntly to the Minister and the Cabinet, to coin a slogan, "No entry on the known Fianna Fáil terms". I would not be attracted towards the kind of terms that have been negotiated to date. On the information available to me, the Department of Industry and Commerce does not seem to be playing a very active role in the negotiations which seem to have been taken over almost exclusively by the Department of Foreign Affairs.
In the absence of hard information from the Government, in the absence of a White Paper, any political party would be stupid to commit itself as being in favour of general entry or to say how it will react to a referendum. Having regard to our comparitively under-developed industry, it must be clearly understood by those negotiating on our behalf that ours is not a normal situation in relation to other European economies. Our income per head of the population is about one-half of that of any one of the Six. As a member we will be a very small mini-region in Europe. We are not prophets of doom as suggested by the Minister but I am expressing legitimate fears of the Labour Party because of the fact that we would be only 1 per cent of the population of an enlarged community and because of that and because we produce only about one-half of 1 per cent of the GNP of the Ten we require special long-term arrangements and exceptionally sympathetic and favourable transitional arrangements. We do not seem to have got them. Certainly, the Department of Industry and Commerce does not seems to have done very much in getting these arrangements.
Of course the Taoiseach waits for the day when he may have a kind of referendum-cum-general election on the EEC and then get his party out of current difficulties. I do not think the country will be so sympathetic to him. I find it rather amusing when I hear balderdash on the part of Ministers about regional development and regional planning in this country arising out of the EEC. If we, at single party Government level, cannot advance any kind of policy in relation to regional economic development in this country, how can we hope to convey to the EEC what we want in terms of regional economic development?
One has only to contrast the current annual report of the IDA with statements made by various Ministers on economic development to realise the terrible dilemma facing the IDA on the question of regional economic development. In the current report, which has been referred to by the Minister, the IDA say that it is the stated objective of the Government that the aim of our regional policy should be to achieve broadly based regional expansion and to keep population disruption as low as possible; that the IDA plans, regionalwise, will cover the period 1972-1976 and will take 1971 as the base year for regional population and employment projections; that the plans would spell out the extra industrial jobs which must be created in each region over the next five years; that they will analyse the problems and prospects within each region affecting industrial development.
They will also examine economic and social development in each region and assess the availability of supporting services for industry. Off go the IDA. Jolly good luck to it. It is better to have the IDA trying to make up its mind as to what kind of regional economic strategy the country should adopt than to have the Cabinet arguing the toss, as the Minister for Finance does. The IDA has now gone ahead and has established a regional organisation, involving the setting up of the new regional headquarters of the IDA, seven regional offices throughout the country, the mid-west region, Clare, Limerick and North Tipperary being administered for the IDA by the Shannon Free Airport Development Company and the eastern region, Dublin, Kildare, Meath and Wicklow being administered from the IDA headquarters in Dublin. That is a magnificent development.
The Minister for Industry and Commerce was asked recently what the Government's policy was in relation to regional economic development. He replied last week in the Dáil and referred us to the 1969 statement of the Government on regional economic planning. I have the quotation here of the 4th November. This is an historic statement now. I quote:
I would refer the Deputy to the statement issued by the Government on the 19th May, 1969. That statement indicated that as an objective of the Government—
et cetera, et cetera—a lot of waffle. He went on to say that an inter-departmental committee are at present considering future regional policy, that they have before them the reports furnished by the Regional Development Committee and that they are also aware of the work being done by the IDA on regional industrial planning. The Minister said he expected to receive a report from the committee shortly.
It is rather peculiar democracy when the State-sponsored body does the thinking, transmits it to the Cabinet and the Cabinet then proceeds to argue the toss as to whether there will be a growth centre in Letterkenny. Presumably, since Deputy Blaney has now been screwed to the ground, his political preoccupation about a growth centre in Letterkenny will receive very low priority. It may be in Clara or in Tullamore or in Portarlington or in Portlaoise.
I am not quite sure where we are going, but I suppose it will depend on the geographical location of the Minister for Industry and Commerce in future Governments. Public servants of this country have my undying admiration for their capacity, which they have in rare abundance—the Irish people are not very much endowed with it—for profound patience and the capacity to know that it is wise and desirable to keep their counsel. Having read through the various CIO reports and the reports on growth centres of the National Industrial and Economic Council between 1964 and 1971 and when one sees the wry smile on the face of men like Mr. Whitaker when the words are mentioned, one begins to appreciate that there is no strategy for industrial development. I do not know what the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dr. Hillery, says in Brussels about Irish regional planning, because the Government have not pronounced on this matter. I asked the Minister only a few days ago if he would make available to Members of both Houses of the Oireachtas the eight regional industrial plans of the IDA when completed by that authority. The Minister replied at column 1419, Volume 256, of the Official Report of 9th November, 1971:
When the drafting of these plans has been completed by the IDA it will be necessary for the Government to consider them in the context of regional policy as a whole. When this has been done it will be circulated to Members of both Houses and made public.
I do not want to remind the IDA of the terrible fate that befell Buchanan and the many other reports that were prepared on the subject. However, at least we have this much consolation, that the IDA, taking its courage in its hands, has gone ahead and carved up the country appropriately, as it saw fit, for example, if I may quote the annual report for 1969-70:
The regional offices will provide a wide range of services for existing and newly-established industry in each region. These will include information and advisory services covering such matters as grants and other incentives, site and factory availability, labour availability, water supply, housing, communications and educational and training facilities. An after-care service for newly-established industrial projects will also be provided regionally. The offices will be responsible for administering the IDA industrial estates, advance factories and industrial housing in their regions.
The principal aims of regional planning are ...
At least one can be thankful that they have taken the initiative, and I wish them well. The former Chairman, Mr. Walsh, and Mr. Killeen have the capacity to make this contribution and to play the politics of the game well. As Mr. Killeen and the former Minister for Industry and Commerce, Mr. Colley, know, both of them have played the game rather well in the past in relation to restructuring but not without comment and not without it being fully known.
Having made these critical comments, which I think are well merited, on the absence of regional development, I wish to deal with a few remaining points in the Minister's speech. There is a need for a further evaluation within the IDA of the small industries programme. While the programme covers the country as a whole and has made some satisfactory progress, we could usefully have a reassessment of the extent to which it contributes effectively to the provision of new jobs. It was launched in 1967 to provide advice and assistance to Irish entrepreneurs in establishing and expanding their small manufacturing enterprises. I have some doubts about the extent to which it has helped the development of small industries in designated areas. The former Minister, Mr. Colley, tended to make a political plaything out of the small industries programme but then Mr. Colley has not grown up in terms of economic development. It might be useful to re-examine this programme.
The House should be gravely concerned about the very serious development in regard to our exports to the United States, which run at some 13 per cent of our total exports, £60 million a year. I believe the measures announced by President Nixon in August will have a more serious effect than the Minister has stated in pages 32 and 33 of his statement. I would hope there would be a very special effort made by the Minister, in consultation with CTT, to ensure that we, at least, maintain our existing level of exports to the United States and, if possible, increase it. I would be happy if, over the next 12 months, we were to maintain the existing proportion, but at the moment the prospects do not look very bright, and if the measures taken by the United States begin to bite more severly it could lead to more redundancies here.
I should like to congratulate CTT on their efforts in the export field. They are a dynamic organisation and have achieved very satisfactory results with not a great deal of assistance from the Government. I am glad to note they have continued the work of promotion against very difficult odds in the past 12 months.
I do not see any policy directives or guidelines from the Government to them. The organisation have been working in a vacuum but they do not seem to be getting assistance along the lines of economic development. An effort should be made to supply them with the collective views of manufacturers, trade unions and other organisations concerned rather than to have CTT scavenging around the various firms to gather economic intelligence. There is great need for co-ordination in that field and the Government could give much greater help.
I am worried also about the role of the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards. We have been rather mealy-mouthed in this respect and have never made up our minds in regard to co-ordination of industrial research throughout the country. We have the development by the IDA of a research park at Naas, admittedly for the benefit of international companies coming in here, but far more money could have been provided for the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards so that they could do much more valuable work for Irish industry. I do not regard as very encouraging the reply given by the Minister to a question on 9th November that research and development grants approved to date had been in respect of only 23 firms. I consider this to be far too small. I suggest that there should be greater liaison between the IDA and the Institute for Research and Standards.
This brings me to the volume of criticism one can now hear of Government policy in regard to failure to co-ordinate the organisations in the industrial field, to co-ordinate their work and their policies in an effort to ensure they do not overlap. Overlapping in this respect has gone on for many years, and one does not need a crystal ball to appreciate the extent of this overlapping in the day-to-day work of these agencies. Through lack of moral courage in this area there is a situation in which many officers, senior staff of the Department of Industry and Commerce and the various other Departments, spend their time running from meeting to meeting, trying to prepare memoranda and reports for the many agencies we have in this relatively small country.
As I have said, there should be more co-ordination between the IDA, Córas Tráchtála, AnCO, the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards and the others. From reading annual reports of these agencies and from listening to replies and statements in the House by the Minister, it seems to me that these companies are individually pursuing their own tasks, possibly from a sense of national identity and purpose, and their collective impact could be far greater if we had a tough and courageous Minister, a tough Cabinet and particularly a tough Taoiseach—and remember he was Minister for Industry and Commerce at a critical stage of development. We need to have a long cool look at the policy being implemented in respect of these organisations with a view to ridding them of the confused functions and the proliferation of work which is bewildering them at the moment.
I strongly urge that the Government should take their courage in their hands immediately and implement the promise they made to co-ordinate and to rationalise these organisations' work so as to ensure that the £30 million to £40 million they yearly dispense to Irish industry will be effectively distributed and effectively administered. It is to that end that I urge a strong and thorough-going root and branch evaluation of the work of these organisations. This has not been undertaken because the towel was thrown in two years ago by Deputy Colley when the going became rough.
I want to deal with a worry I have in relation to the export tax incentive scheme and the recent results at Brussels, confirmed by the Minister for Foreign Affairs. I ask the Minister to produce the text of the agreement in this respect between Ireland and the Community. We have had assurances from the Minister in reply to questions and I should like to quote Deputy B. Lenihan on behalf of the Minister for Foreign Affairs in this regard:
To quote the Minister:
The position has been clearly established that export tax reliefs are necessary for our economic and industrial development and that we can continue them as based on my intensive discussions with the Community on 19th October, the understanding reached there and the agreement in the text of the proposed Protocol.
The Minister went on to say:
As regards the reference in my statement to the Community on the 19th October on commitments in relation to export tax reliefs, the position established is that firms in respect of which commitments had been entered into at the time of the completion by the Commission after accession of its examination of our industrial incentives will continue to benefit from export tax reliefs for the full period of entitlement under existing legislation.
I would await the White Paper before giving formal credence to the Minister on that statement because, certainly, if one takes the introductory statement by the Community Delegation of 19th October, 1971, it is not very explicit. It merely says:
The Irish Delegation has also explained how the exporting industries are supported by tax relief. In this respect it is also a question of measures the aim of which is to do away with economic and social imbalances by the development of industry.
It goes on to state:
With regard to State aids for regional purposes it should be pointed out that, under the terms of Article (3) (a) aid to promote the economic development of areas where the standard of living is abnormally low or where there is serious under-employment may be considered to be compatible with the Common Market.
Again it is not terribly explicit in terms of the Minister's statement.
The text of the Protocol itself is, with due respect to the Minister, a lot of cliché-style waffle. I will read these paragraphs for the Minister, because he has been congratulated by Deputy Donegan for protecting Irish export tax reliefs for Irish industry. The very short Protocol says that the member states:
Recall that the fundamental objectives of the Community consist in the steady improvement of the living standards and working conditions of the peoples of the Member States, together with the harmonious development of their economies by reducing the differences existing between the various regions and the backwardness of the less favoured regions;
Take note of the fact that the Irish Government has embarked upon the implementation of a policy of industrialisation and economic development designed to align the standard of living in Ireland with those of other European nations and to eliminate under-employment while progressively evening out regional differences in levels of development; Recognise it to be in their common interest that the objectives of this policy be so attained;
Agree to recommend to this end that the Community institutions implement all the means and procedures laid down by the Treaties, particularly by making adequate use of the Community resources intended for the realisation of the Community's above-mentioned objectives;
Recognise in particular that, in the application of Articles 92 and 93, it will be necessary to take into account the objectives of economic expansion and improvement of the population's standard of living.
I do not think that one has to travel to Brussels to get that in the form of a Protocol. Frankly, it does not mean a great deal if this is to be the Protocol and the magic formula.
I hope that, when the White Paper is published, we will have some background data and more detail of the precise agreement reached between the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Community on the continuation of our export tax relief system for existing industries at 1990; and of course any new industry coming in between now and the date of accession would have the benefit of the current system. If that is so, the text of whatever letter or minute of whatever arrangement was reached between the Minister and the Community should be published and made available. It certainly is not available in the statement by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, apart from the statement:
I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the question would arise in this connection of the commitments which we had previously entered into. We shall, of course, have to honour these commitments and we shall be ready to discuss in all its aspects, the changeover to whatever new incentive system is devised and we shall collaborate in solving these problems in an appropriate way.
There is no paragraph, no sentence, in the statement by the Minister to the ministerial meeting of 19th October which indicates that there has been acceptance by the Community of the Irish system of export tax reliefs, and frankly until I see it, I intend to keep an open mind on it, because the greatest single advantage we have and the most enticing inducement we have for economic development is of course the 20 year tax holiday. Whatever we have, we certainly have that exemption from tax on profit from exports made in Ireland for 15 years and partial exemption for a further five years. That inducement has been a major factor in the development of exportoriented industries in this country and I certainly would be extremely concerned that it should be diluted in any way.
The Minister is to be commended for his promise to bring in new legislation relating to prices. I think he was a bit sweeping when he said in his opening statement:
All proposals to increase prices will be submitted to the Commission for consideration and the Commission will furnish me with a recommendation on each such proposal.
If one contrasts that with the statement made by the Minister in public on September 9th, one cannot see that that is the precise procedure intended, as I gather from the Minister that the present requirement of three months advance notice of intention to increase prices will be modified so as to require one month's advance notice and, as I understand it as well, a proposed price increase could be put into effect on the expiration of the month's notice unless the commission advise that it should be the subject of a detailed examination.
I certainly welcome the introduction of this legislation but I would point out very strongly that it is belated, that it is years overdue, and that it has—to use a Blaney term—been screwed out of the Minister because of the current extreme situation in respect of price increases. It is not necessary to be a Deputy to point out that over the past two years prices have been rising at an unprecedented rate. Between November, 1963, and November, 1970, alone the consumer price index went up by 18½ per cent. In the past 12 months prices have gone up by well over 10 per cent and, while prices have been rising rapidly in most countries over this period, the increases in prices here have been significantly greater than the increases in any of the other countries. The price increases we are now experiencing over the past 12 months give rise to concern, and in some cases even to alarm.
It is a matter of some serious concern to the House to note that the prices legislation, which the Minister now promises to bring in and hopes to circulate in the near future, will not begin to have effect before at least mid-1972. It will be at least mid-1972 before it begins to have an effect and before the surveillance system of prices comes into operation effectively. It should be stressed that in the national agreement of the employerlabour conference the parties agreed that it was essential that the rate of increase in cost and in prices should be moderated substantially. That agreement has been in operation for a long time but there has been very little real action by the Government in respect of excessive price increases. The Labour Party accept the view that the mere setting-up of surveillance machinery does not of itself prevent higher prices particularly with regard to imported goods or materials. We cannot do a great deal where money incomes outstrip productivity. There are well-defined limitations on the extent to which price rises generally can be controlled. Had an effective system of price surveillance been in operation over the past 12 months, price increases would have been limited to a minimum and price or charges increases without justification would have been prevented.
The public at large have good reason to believe that, in some instances, prices have risen on an unjustifiable basis, on an excessive basis and on a selective basis in some industries. There is need for the Minister to bring in this legislation as a matter of urgency. This House, instead of driving ourselves crazy about the price of honour, would have done better work if the Government had realised the seriousness of the position and put legislation through the House instead of engaging in power politics on the part of Fianna Fáil. We have had an obsession with this kind of thing over the past two years.
The Minister has shelved the proposal of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions for the setting-up of local price committees. In the submission made to the Minister by the Congress it was pointed out that public involvement in the price surveillance machinery was needed. It was suggested that this should take the form of local price committees which should be set up in the main centres of population throughout the country and that these committees should be representative of the Chambers of Commerce, related local organisations of local trades' councils and of appropriate voluntary organisations such as the Irish Housewives Association, and that they should also include public representatives, who should exercise some influence on prices at local level. Certain statutory functions should devolve on these committees. There is no reason why, in a very large number of trading establishments, adequate price lists should not be displayed. With the introduction of decimal currency there has been no effort on the part of many traders to publish and maintain price lists in public areas of their premises.
Many tourists have told me of going into lounge bars and of finding enormous differences in prices as between one style of premises and another. The price of a drink varies from one type of premises to another and we have pub-style premises, singing-pub premises, take-away food stalls, ballad-singing pubs and hotels. There is a wide variation in drink prices. We speak of tourists not coming in, but many tourists, who have come, have complained that on the east coast they have been charged varying prices for drinks and food and that price lists were not displayed openly. Prices and service charges should be clearly displayed. Local price committees could watch such matters. Local citizens would also be involved in this work, thus ensuring adequate price surveillance at local level.
The Minister has not rejected the proposition of Congress for local committees but has said that he has requested the new commission to consider the proposal. It may be some time before the commission examines this point. I was disappointed to hear that the proposal of Congress that the National Prices Commission should take over the functions and powers of the Fair Trade Commission was not acceptable to the Minister. The Minister has decided on the National Prices Commission as a "never-never land" between the prices section and another section of the Department of Industry and Commerce. Presumably staff arrangements have now been made. I welcome the setting-up of the commission and hope that the legislation will pass through the House quickly.
The members of the House fully appreciate the action being taken by such organisations as the Irish Housewives Association. With the absence of effective local price commissions it is understandable that these organisations should engage in certain actions at local level, such as asking housewives to omit from their shopping lists certain items on which they feel they have excessive price increases. There are wide disparities which are noticeable. I asked the Taoiseach on the 20th October to give a list of the items included on the consumer price index which increased in price by more than 15 per cent over the 12 months ending 21st August. The Taoiseach gave me the percentage change on all the items. The list shows that sirloin steak rose in price by 16 per cent; corn beef, 16 per cent; whiting 14 per cent; cured fish 16 per cent; tomatoes 134 per cent; carrots 26 per cent; turnips 21 per cent; cabbage 30 per cent; cauliflowers 31 per cent. I do not think one can blame the National Wage Agreement for that kind of increase in a 12-month period. Margarine prices increased by 13 per cent; apples 27 per cent; oranges 18 per cent; sugar 13 per cent; jelly 5 per cent; chocolate bars 17 per cent; minerals 13 per cent; women's outer clothing, coats, woollen-lined, lowpriced 16 per cent; two-piece suits, worsted readymade 11 per cent; thread 15 per cent; coal 15 per cent. We also have today's newspaper announcement of a substantial increase in the price of coal. Rates and water charges in owner-occupied dwellings over the past 12 months have gone up by 22 per cent, which is quite substantial. These are the type of increases which we certainly feel should be investigated by the Minister because they have certainly had a dramatic impact on the standard of living of workers in this country. It is about time that legislation to control those prices was circulated in this House and that we got down to debating it. It does not look as though we will have it in operation for at least another six to nine months.
I welcome the decision of the Minister to include under the system of price control new houses, all services, professional fees, insurance charges and the profits of importers and distributors under a new system. It is high time that these areas were covered in legislation. There is great urgency to complete the legislation relating to the control and investigation of monopolies, takeovers and mergers. There have been some very questionable developments relating to take-overs in Irish industry in the past two years. As well as take-overs by foreign monopolies there have been some quite dubious internal absorptions and realisation of assets by some of our brighter new industrial rich in this country and I am sure Deputy Donegan knows whom I am referring to.