The announcement yesterday which, strictly speaking, came from the coal trade or, from the major coal company in the country, rather than from the Minister for Industry and Commerce, to the effect that the Minister had approved price increases ranging up to 26 per cent in the price of coal has flabbergasted a community already, one would have thought, almost immune to shocks having regard to the nature and extent of the price increases imposed on them since this Government took office. It is a rather sick joke to remind oneself of it now but there was the 14-point plan which had as its major plank the promise "to control and stabilise prices" and that promise was apparently believed by some of the electorate. That promise was spelled out by many—the Minister for Local Government was one of them—to mean the maintenance of prices at the level they were at at the end of February, 1973. At that time there was inflation of 8 per cent.
Adjournment Debate. - Coal Price Increases.
Not true. In the last quarter before we came into office it was 14.1 per cent.
In the middle of November last inflation was in excess of 20 per cent. We are at the top of the inflation league in both the EEC and the OECD. We are told a budget can be expected here tomorrow. I suggest there was a budget yesterday, a budget which will have a most harsh effect on a very large number of people. That budget was rubber stamped by the Minister without a thought as to the effect this increase in the price of a basic necessity, coal, would have on tens of thousands of people. The Minister rubber stamped increases ranging from 17 per cent to 26 per cent on the cheapest coal hitherto available.
It is a bit farcical to get worked up about what will happen here tomorrow at half past three. It is a nonsense to describe tomorrow's exercise as the only budget because there is scarcely a week in which there is not a budget and some weeks there is scarcely a day in which effectively there is not a budget. What was done yesterday cannot but have a most serious effect on a large section of the community, a very vulnerable section indeed because those who will suffer most by these enormous increases in the price of coal—Polish coal has been increased to £45.92 per ton and English coal to £46.72 per ton—are the very poorest in the community. In large urban areas like Dublin literally tens of thousands depend on coal and coal alone for heating. A great many of these are old age pensioners, very frequently in frail health. This savage increase is imposed on them in a month in which we have had the most severe weather since 1963. This increase is imposed in an exceptionally severe January and the result will be that many will have to do without coal or reduce their usage of it with consequential serious ill-effects on their health and wellbeing. In some cases the effects may be fatal.
This outrageous price increase has actually been backdated 11 days to 13th January. What kind of price control is this backdated to that extent? It is ludicrous that that sort of thing should be allowed and that orders given to fuel merchants as long back as that should be subject to increases announced 11 days later.
It is suggested there has been a falling-off of deliveries over the past couple of weeks and it is easy to see now why that should be so. It is something that should certainly not have been allowed. The Minister has put himself in the position where he agrees to rubber stamp every recommendation of the Prices Commission without taking into account the tremendous hardship such a step will inevitably cause tens of thousands of the most vulnerable and weakest in our community. In fact, so little does the Minister care about price increases and inflation that a couple of years ago he hived off from his own functions to his very junior Parliamentary Secretary the whole question of prices, inflation, consumer protection, and so on, and he does not now concern himself at all with these matters.
The vast majority who use coal have no alternative form of heating. They do not have central heating. They do not have gas or electricity, both of which are pretty expensive anyway. Coal is the only fuel they have and they will now be put in a situation of enormous hardship. The Minister will probably say, as he frequently does, that these are imported costs and there is nothing he can do about them. But Ireland is not significantly subject to imported costs any more than other countries and other countries seem to manage their affairs and their inflation rates much more successfully than the country run by people whose main plank in their election platform was the promise to control and stabilise prices at the point they had reached in February, 1973.
I would like now to illustrate the position by quoting from the latest authority available, namely, the report of the Central Bank published yesterday, page 32, Table I, where the percentage increases in consumer goods in various countries in the year ended October, 1976, are as follows: United States 5.3; Canada 6.2; Japan 8.3; Germany 3.8; France 9.9; United Kingdom 14.8; Ireland 20.6; Italy 20.4; Belgium 8.4; Netherlands 8.7; Denmark 9.3. We have the sorry distinction of heading the table as we seem to head so many other tables in which it would be better for us not to appear at all.
We were heading it also when we came into office.
This is a serious reflection on a Government who have reduced the economy to the parlous state it is in today.
I am anxious to ensure the Deputy does not deviate from the subject matter of the question raised which deals with the increase in the price of coal.
Coal is one of the basic necessities which go to making up the consumer price index to which I referred in relation to this country and to other countries to show we were higher in 1976 in relation to both EEC and OECD countries. I should like to draw attention to the fact that the consumer price index seriously affected by this savage increase in the price of coal, allowed as of yesterday but backdated to 13th January, will be raised very significantly. It is not just factors like this that have caused us to be at the top of the inflation league in every table in which we appear. An important reason for that is that the Government have made a major contribution to raising the cost of living and we have only to look back to the budget introduced 12 months ago where indirect tax increases imposed meant that the Government themselves were responsible for five points of the increases last year——
The Deputy is clearly widening the subject matter of the question. That is not in order.
I do not propose to go on very long because my colleagues, Deputy Andrews and Deputy Dowling, wish to say a few words about this also. I shall conclude by saying I and the Fianna Fáil Party condemn in the strongest possible terms what the Minister has callously allowed to happen in relation to the price of coal, to the detriment of the weakest in our community and at a time of year when the greatest harm and damage will be done to their health and comfort and, indeed, in some cases I am afraid to their very lives.
This Government, in addition to being known as the Government who made food a luxury, are now taking unto themselves the doubtful honour of being the Government who made coal a luxury. That is exactly what they have made it. What strikes me about the increases yesterday is, as Deputy O'Malley so correctly described it, the callous way they introduced it in the middle of a severe winter. Added to that is the cynical fashion in which it was introduced. According to the media and all the mandarins who comment on our economy, we can expect what they have described as a reasonably good budget. According to a headline in one of the evening papers there is a distinct possibility that the price of gas will also be increased by the same percentage as the price of coal. There is a sort of softening-up process. The continued increases in the price of coal, oil, electricity and gas must be a source of considerable worry to the Minister's socialist colleagues. Many people cannot afford the luxury of oil-fired central heating, electric central heating or gas-fired central heating. The Minister for Industry and Commerce, who is a member of the Labour Party, glibly tries to defend these desperate price increases on an almost weekly basis. Would the Minister consider introducing once and for all a proper and positive energy policy?
The Minister describes energy as an on-going problem and his solution is to allow the price increases sought. For the benefit of old people living on their own, such as pensioners, would the Minister consider asking Bord na Móna, one of the finest semi-State bodies in the country, to increase the production of briquettes to ensure that the older and less welloff sections of the community are properly catered for in the context of these savage increases?
Deputy Dowling wants to say a few words and it is not my intention to hold him up. I respectfully suggest to the Minister that the people who are being hardest hit by these desperate increases are the people who can least afford to pay them. We can only hope that tomorrow the Government will in some way mend the error of their ways by increasing social welfare entitlements considerably for people who can least afford these Government-sanctioned increases in the cost of heating. Coal is no longer a luxury. The Government have now made it a luxury. It is a tragedy that they have done so.
I support the viewpoint put forward by Deputy O'Malley and Deputy Andrews. I abhor the manner in which these increases were made known with the Minister hiding behind either the National Prices Commission or Coal Importers or some other body. Somebody had to do the dirty work and make the announcement. The Minister should stand up and be counted because this is a very serious matter. As Deputy O'Malley rightly pointed out, the poorest sections of the community are most affected. Old age pensioners are dependent on coal not only for heating but for cooking. This leads to a serious situation having regard to our climate. People living in working-class areas in Dublin are solely dependent on solid fuels such as coal. The normal consumption of coal in these households is approximately two bags per week. The increase in price for the average household is £1.20 per week or £63 a year. I wonder what will be the offsetting factors tomorrow when the budget proposals are disclosed to us.
The Minister should ensure that the promises made before the last election are honoured to some degree. He has reneged on his responsibility. He has deserted the people who supported him. He has thrown them to the wolves. He has proved probably the most efficient member of any Government in relation to the signing of price increases. It appears that all his time is devoted to sitting in his office and signing price increases. His Department have done very little other work. He has sanctioned price increase after price increase, deserting the people who supported him and reneging on the promises made. This savage increase which has been passed on to the working-class is a burden they will be unable to carry. The 117,000 unemployed will have a cold winter. If they are to survive they must get fuel somewhere. The Minister must provide an alternative and he must provide the necessary finances to maintain heat in their homes. Think of the old people who are totally dependent on coal not only for heat but for cooking. This situation cannot be glossed over by the Minister or the Government. This matter has been dealt with in a grossly irresponsible way. By leaks we are told about price increases. The Minister is not man enough to stand up and make the announcement. By leaks we hear of prices increases almost daily. The budget-a-day Government we have come to know so well presented a budget today on the price of coal and we will have another budget tomorrow.
I must now call on the Minister to reply.
May I ask the Minister if there are any other price increases he is holding back until after the budget?
It is interesting that three people were put in by the Opposition to take up the time on this and I should have thought that, with 20 minutes at their disposal, if any of them had anything to say he might have used that time to say it. Apart from ritual abuse, suitable to a crossroads in an election year but not suitable for a serious subject in the Dáil, none of them had anything of importance to say. It is degrading for a national parliament to conduct a serious debate in such terms of infantile abuse. The suggestion that people are indifferent is simply abuse. The suggestion that Ministers act without awareness of the consequences is simply abuse. The statement that this bears very severely on the most disadvantaged section of the population is true and is as profoundly regretted on this side of the House as it is on the other side.
A serious Opposition, if they were trying to demonstrate our inadequacy and their superiority and trying to have a serious debate on this subject would have to look at the figures and the causes. On the basis of doing that they would have to indicate why and in what way we were culpable. Most important of all, they would have to indicate how the increases could have been avoided and what the other courses open to the Government were. If they do not do that they are degrading parliament and indulging in light-hearted abuse.
It is fair that I should put on the record of the House the origins of these increases. We must remember that there are two separate things, Polish coal and British coal. While the prices were appreciably different until the present increases they are now very similar. The increase in Polish coal approved for Dublin— there are differences for each of the cities—was £9.53 per metric ton. Of that the increase in the landed cost was £8.73p, while 80p or 2 per cent originated in Ireland. Of the increase in the Polish price half was due to their normal across-the-board increase and half to the appreciation of Polish currency relative to our £.
To mount a serious criticism Opposition Deputies must seriously indicate how we could go on securing Polish coal without paying the increase in price which the Poles imposed. The other line they could take is to say there was nothing we could do about the Polish price. If they want to go the road of subsidies they should say so, but there was no mention from the three Opposition speakers of that. If we do not go that road, what else should we do? An Opposition who condemn something in wonderful thumping terms without suggesting an alternative cannot expect to be taken seriously.
Can coal be bought cheaper in any other country?
We also buy British coal. In the case of that coal the lower percentage increase is £5.78p. That is the increase in the cost landed imposed by the British Coal Board and the increase accruing in Ireland, again, is 80p. Although it is a bigger percentage it is a small part of the total increase. In Dublin Polish coal costs £44.73p while British coal costs £45.48p. They are now almost the same but in the recent past Polish coal was more than £3 per ton cheaper. The Poles have removed that difference between the price of their coal and the price of British coal.
With the increase in the price of oil there is a swing to other energy sources and people find they can get more for their coal. The coal exporters, like the Poles, can increase the price in the market place. Then the Irish, who in the total sphere of Polish or British production are tiny, can either pay the increased price or not take the coal, but nobody has suggested that. I have no pleasure and no indifference in doing this.
The Minister could contact Bord na Móna and ask them to increase the production of briquettes.
That is not my Departmental responsibility and I am not familiar with the details but I understand this has been done substantially since the energy crisis. I agree with the Deputy that that is a valid line. I wish that the price of coal, which has increased dramatically, would cause people to swing more to an indigenous source. It is fair also that I should say something about the role of the National Prices Commission. I do not rubber stamp what they do. I find, representing as they do interests as various as the CII, on the one hand, and the trade unions and housewives' associations on the other, that when they do a job in their collective wisdom, with consultants if they need them, and tell me that an increase cannot be avoided, no amount of scrutiny on my part, in the vast majority of cases, is able to provide a way of avoiding it, much as I or they might want to do so. My alternatives under the prices code would be to bankrupt people and remove the possible margin of profit from firms so that if they were not currently bankrupt it would be impossible for them to modernise. It would also be impossible for them to stay competitive and if we did not lose currently we would lose in the future. I will continue to operate the prices code, whatever people say to me, in a way that takes notice of the necessary economic health of Irish firms.
What about the promises of February, 1973?
This is ground we covered before and the answer is that we inherited the highest rate of inflation in the Community from the present Opposition.
The Minister knew about the rate of inflation when he made his promises.
When they were made we did not know that the oil crisis and the world recession, the most serious for 40 years, were coming. They made it impossible for us to do things we would have liked to. That answer is obvious to everybody and has been repeated many times. The nub of this matter is that this is as bitterly regretted on this side as it is by the Opposition. The date of the imposition of price rises by the Poles and the British was not of our choosing because this is not an indigenous but an imported product. Less than 2 per cent of the increase originated here.
Why backdate is for 11 days?
Because the importers' price increase had been imposed some time ago. We bitterly regret this but we either pay the price landed in Ireland or we do not have the coal. With the best will in the world and the greatest of embarrassment—of course it is embarrassing— those things are outside my control or the control of any other Minister for Industry and Commerce and any honest Opposition would admit that.
The old can freeze to death.
The Dáil adjourned at 9 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 26th January, 1977.