I bow to the Chair's ruling but I am merely trying to emphasise that we must explore every avenue in relation to the difficult task of job creation. I hope to see what I have just suggested being put into practice some day.
We look to the construction industry to provide employment. I am glad that this sector is now moving ahead and will provide more and more jobs for craftsmen and craftswomen. We must make sure that this industry is not hindered in any way by lack of finance or industrial unrest. Many thousands of dwellings have been built. In parts of the country we can say that the housing problem has been solved, in so far as it can be solved. As the population continues to grow there will always be a need for housing. After agriculture, our greatest investment should be in the construction industry. Many people can be employed in providing for the essential needs of the community. We have got rid of the worst of the slums. We are in the second phase of the housing drive and are now replacing houses or flats which were built 50 years ago.
Despite all the millions which have already been spent on the housing drive, we now have to spend as much again. This is an on-going situation. We will never be free of the necessity to satisfy housing demands. Because of the demand for housing we have an avenue for the provision of worth-while employment. We must ensure that the construction industry will be the main beneficiary of the largesse of the State, though we know that the State purse is not bottomless. It is ridiculous that thousands of building workers should be unemployed while thousands of people are waiting for dwellings. People now marry younger and want higher standards of housing. Demands will increase enormously in both the private and local authority sectors.
I congratulate the Minister on what he has already achieved in the building trade. Advertisements are now appearing again in the newspapers seeking various types of craftsmen. In relation to two types of craftsmen, it is very difficult to obtain their services. It may be that there are not sufficient apprentices and perhaps the recruitment of apprentices should be opened up. If there is any reduction in the numbers of boys and girls in training, then we will have to face the results of that in three or four years' time. I am glad that the Minister is energetically tackling this problem through AnCO and other organisations.
I am also glad that the Minister has tackled in a realistic way the problem of the employment of the disabled. Many people pay lip service to this, but the Minister has outlined what he has done. We are too poor a country to be able to do without the services of the disabled. Many of them can make a tremendous contribution to the national economy. I applaud those organisations who, mostly by voluntary effort, are training disabled people to play their part in society. We should provide every possible aid so that such people can perfect their skills and lead useful lives working in industry or commerce. We should do this not as an act of generality but because of the contribution which these people can make. The employment of the disabled is not a new concept, but the fact that this matter is being taken seriously is a new aspect. We thank all the organisations involved for the work they have done in helping disabled people.
The Minister referred to the careers information service. He has set out what is done every year. Few people realise that about four million pamphlets a year are distributed to advise young people on the choice of career. Recently I was in a city and the town hall had been taken over for a week by career guidance experts so that young people could meet them and receive advice. This is an excellent idea which could be adopted in every city or town.
Those who have worked in industry have seen the folly of allowing a young person to take up a job because it was the only job available. Very often that outlook was the cause of much harm to the person and to the industry involved. I note that the Minister for Education has taken steps regarding a training course in career guidance. This is very important. If we are to build up the industrial arm of the economy, people must be engaged in work which they like and for which they have an aptitude. Cynics will say that we have not the jobs for them, but this is part of the task of providing employment.
Nations which have almost full employment have spent countless millions on technical, vocational and commercial education. We cannot afford not to do this because we need a well-trained workforce. We have disadvantages from which other countries do not suffer; but, on the other hand, we have advantages such as the aptitude of the Irish worker. It is often said nowadays that people do not want to work, but this is not true of the vast majority. They will even take on jobs which are distasteful to them because work brings its own discipline. A person who goes through life in full employment has much to contribute to the common good.
It is up to us to give every boy and girl an opportunity for full employment and, through career guidance, build up a most efficient and powerful labour force which could hold its own anywhere in Europe. We have to do that especially in these days of free trade. Our people must be as good as the Danes, the French, the Belgians and the Germans. We must face this challenge and ensure that our people can compete with Europeans. I do not see any merit in a system which forces its workers to emigrate. Some continental countries were destroyed during the war and since then were able to rebuild their economies. If we had the necessary determination we could do that too, but we must have certain disciplines. We must develop them and make sure we are doing the best for our people.
The Minister referred at length to industrial relations. This is a very thorny field. I have always thought it should be called "human relations" because a person does not change when he goes to work in a factory or an office. It is the conditions in that factory or office which changes his outlook and which might turn a quiet person into a militant worker carrying a placard saying "Strike on Here". We are very thankful that the number of man-days lost through strikes has been dropping very dramatically. While official strikes occur for very good reasons, what worries me are the unofficial strikes and how to deal with them. Unofficial strikes are a problem not alone for the employers and the community at large but also for the unions, because every unofficial strike is a vote of no confidence in the trade union. It is not enough to condemn unofficial strikers. We must ask ourselves why they take place. The person who comes up with the answer to that major problem will save this country many millions of pounds and jobs.
I worked on a shop floor and saw more than my share of unofficial strikes. It must be admitted that in some cases they are justified. It can happen that management will not listen to a genuine grievance or will prevaricate and drag out negotiations; but when a picket is put on the gate the moment of truth dawns on them. Then there is a rush to reach a patched up solution and get the men back to work. This can and does happen. I am not saying that people who go on unofficial strike always have a good reason for doing so. It is often merely a reflection of the times we live in.
Japan is one of the most heavily industrialised, progressive and prosperous nations of the world. Their new Tokyo Airport cannot be opened because of a type of unofficial strike. They are a disciplined nation. At present there are more unofficial than official strikes in this country and as I said, it is very hard to know how to end them. One way would be if each trade unionist said: "I will not go on strike unless it is an official action agreed by the unions." We will not get that kind of discipline until we have had another look at the whole trade union structure and see how it can be built into a strong structure.
People say the unions are too strong, but I believe they are too weak. I sympathise with the unions who, having negotiated a new industrial pact or productivity agreement, having satisfied their members that it was the best they could get and that it was a just settlement, find that one man appears next morning carrying a placard saying "Strike on here". That is very trying. How often do we see people refusing to pass a picket even though it is unofficial?
The trade unions must find this discipline among themselves. The commission set up by the Minister to examine industrial relations will probably spend a great deal of time considering unofficial strikes, and rightly so. I support the Minister's plea that unions should be in the Irish Congress of Trade Unions. I spoke with the members of a union which is not in congress and they gave various reasons for this. While some of their arguments were convincing, looking at the whole picture they were not sufficient reasons for staying outside. If we are to have orderly advancement we must make sure that the dissidents in the trade union movement and in the employer organisations are well organised and disciplined. Only in that way will we make progress towards achieving full employment. Last year, because of what happened in one major concern we got a very bad name abroad. It was unfortunate that happened and perhaps it could have been avoided. There may have been facts the public did not know about. This situation is not peculiar to this country. In the United Kingdom, which is not a model of industrial harmony, we have seen many strikes, particularly in the motor industry, which lasted a very long time and happened very often. We must not take that industry as something to be copied. We must take the good points from the British scene, but we must not believe that the cause of our trade unions would be advanced by acting in a way similar to that in which some of those in the British motor trade act. I read recently a report of a strike in Scotland that went on for six months.
I accept that we need to do a lot to perfect our industrial relations, but it should not go forth that we are a black spot in this respect. We are better than many countries, although we have a lot to do if we are to reach a high level in this regard. We are a small economy and the British can withstand such strikes better than we can. For that reason we should not copy their bad habits. They have a long industrial tradition behind them. Even though they may not be the empire they once were, their economy is quite strong. We are only a young nation building up our economy but we are doing ourselves harm if we have unhappy, industrial or human relations.
The commission which the Minister has established to probe all questions on industrial relations will meet next month and I hope they will come up with answers which will be acceptable to trade unions and employers. We have to realise that unless we establish a worth-while economic unit we will not make progress. The trade unions and the employers are the spearhead of our drive towards greater employment and prosperity. They are important functions in our society. A Government can only do a certain amount towards achieving industrial harmony: it is not possible for them to legislate harmony into the industrial scene. A Government can introduce helpful legislation but in the final analysis the big effort must come from the trade unions and the employers.
I support the Minister's attitude in relation to intervention by him in industrial disputes. I accept that that used happen in the old days but when one strike finished another one loomed. We must remember that the Labour Court is available and that court has a record in industrial relations of which we can all be proud. We must also remember that we have the service of rights commissioners and other advisory services of the Labour Court. There is no reason why we should have any injustices on the labour scene. Those involved in industrial disputes should avail of the services provided by the State.
The Minister has been criticised for his failure to intervene in industrial disputes. However, if an unofficial strike is a mark of no confidence in a trade union then the intervention of a Minister could be taken as a mark of no confidence in the machinery set up by the State to deal with industrial disputes. All we need on the industrial scene is a bit of common sense, because nobody benefits by a strike. After long drawn out strikes unfortunate strikers, when they count up their gains and losses, finish up losing a lot. In negotiations between unions and employers workers should take any improvements offered and move on from there. In that way people would be getting better conditions without any loss of pay.
Perhaps it would be too much to expect that all employers have their factory premises in peak condition, but if an unsatisfactory situation exists employees can refer to the legislation laying down conditions for factory premises. Employers who do not comply can be prosecuted. If legislation in that regard is out of date it should be amended.
Job creation is being affected by unofficial strikes and lockouts and that is an injustice to those who do not have a job. We must all give more thought to those not fortunate enough to have a job. If we consider their plight we will realise that there is an onus on every one of us to do something to bring about a change in our economy so that more people can be employed. I should like to know how many jobs will result from early retirement proposals because in most cases those who retire are seldom replaced. There may be a cutback in the total expenditure of that factory or office but, thanks to new machinery, output would be increased. We would then have fewer people producing a greater amount of goods— capitalism at its unacceptable worst.
We have the goodwill of the majority of the trade unions and employers and we want to get the goodwill of the minority responsible for unofficial strikes. Unofficial strikes occur for many trivial reasons. If one travels the roads of this city early in the morning one will often see people stranded because of an unofficial bus strike. That is not playing the game because fellow workers are being penalised and in some cases the fact that they are late for work will mean a loss of money for them. We must eliminate unofficial strikes if possible. Circumstances may arise when an unofficial strike has to take place because some people might not listen to grievances. Some years ago a number of men went on strike because they were supplied with shovels that had short handles. That could have been described as a wildcat or silly strike but if one had to work for a long number of hours with a short handled shovel one could develop backaches. That is an example of what can happen. The person who supplied those shovels should have decided, after hearing the complaints of the workers, to replace them. That is just one instance of why an unofficial strike took place. In that case it was the short handles on the shovels; in other cases it is the shortsightedness of the employers.
We must do everything to create the greatest possible number of jobs so as to use our natural resources and abilities with a view to creating full employment. It will not be easy. It is not just a matter for the Minister, although he and his Department have an important role to play in creating the conditions to encourage employment. We must show potential investors that they will get a return for their money. Firms invest money to make a profit and not just for the common good. We must show investors that we can produce on at least the same level as other countries.
The Minister referred to an employment maintenance scheme for industries such as the clothing and footwear industries. In these industries there is very unfair competition from abroad. If one looks for Irish made shoes in the shops it is not easy to get them. The "Buy Irish" slogan is very good in helping to create employment but a "Sell Irish" campaign should be introduced to push Irish made goods with a view to creating more employment. Very often Irish made products are superior to the imported ones. We must encourage people not alone to buy Irish but to sell Irish. Yesterday morning I heard the British Prime Minister make an appeal to his people not to buy foreign goods. If the British Prime Minister can make such an appeal it is understandable that we who have a much weaker economy should make an appeal to the people to buy Irish. Even with this sort of co-operation it will be difficult to be successful in combating the unemployment problem. I look forward to the Government's Green Paper which will be out shortly. It is a further step towards creating full employment. We will be judged mostly on the provision of employment.
