Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 24 May 1979

Vol. 314 No. 9

Estimates, 1979. - Vote 42: Labour (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:

That a sum not exceeding £33,710,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December 1979 for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Labour, including certain services administered by that Office, and for payment of certain grants-in-aid.

—(Minister for Labour.)

Mr. Moore

The Minister's speech introducing this Estimate contained much valuable comment on the overall labour scene. The carping criticism which came from the Opposition showed an approach totally out of touch with what is happening today. I do not think they earned any kudos by their criticism. The people are now so seriously affected by industrial unrest that they blame the establishment rather than one unit of that establishment. There is an onus on each Member of this House to strive to bring about a better atmosphere in industrial relations in order to ward off a more damaging situation.

It is pertinent to ask what is wrong. Some of the industrial unrest is caused by men who are underpaid and in many ways underprivileged, but some of it is caused by people who flaunt their wealth and seek to become richer, irrespective of how the other half lives. Institutions such as the Labour Court have done a tremendous amount of good work. So also have the ICTU, who recently made great efforts in regard to the national understanding. There is goodwill in many quarters but we do not seem to be able to channel that goodwill towards better industrial relations.

The Minister has set up a commission to inquire into industrial relations, and I hope they will report soon. However, I wonder if this will radically improve matters. We must change attitudes in the various sectors to which we individually belong. An effective review must be undertaken of our existing institutions and, if they are not working satisfactorily, we must change them. I never believed in long-term settlements and I feel we should have more interim planning. I would suggest the setting up of a council, composed of representatives of trade unions, the Government and the employers, to whom claims for increased wages or better conditions would be sent. They would vet these claims and quickly issue a decision on them. Basically this is the idea behind the national understanding.

If we had the sort of committee that I suggest sitting in permanent session and examining all these claims we should be much better off because very often the reason for a strike is delay in reaching a decision on a claim.

The Government must be the ultimate decision-making body, but they must have regard to the global situation and that is why they sometimes appear to be stringent. The Government must have regard to the extent to which wage increases might also increase the rate of inflation. Today more than ever before it is essential that the people understand decisions taken by the Government and that is another area in which the type of body I have in mind could be of much benefit. They could explain the situation to those seeking increases. It is important that people understand that there is not much point in a wage increase as such if it is not a real increase, that is, if it does not increase purchasing power.

If we are not to find ourselves in a disastrous situation in terms of inflation each sector must examine their position. What is required today more than ever is national discipline in all sectors. It is easy to tell the factory worker that he may not have an increase in pay but we must examine the whole system in this regard and try to ensure that people at the other end of the line are not getting massive dividends, because big incomes at that level can be as inflationary as are excessive wage claims. It may be said that those in receipt of dividends are much smaller in number than are factory workers, for instance, but higher standards of living must be achieved by way of the ordinary negotiating process rather than that those groups with the most muscle, whether on the factory floor or in the boardroom, win the day.

We are not making progress on the industrial relations scene. Perhaps we have contracted some of the English sickness in the area of strikes and industrial unrest generally, but I appeal to the people to reconsider the whole situation regarding strikes and go-slows. I regard the strike weapon as being outmoded. As I said before it is tantamount to using a bow and arrow in modern warfare. The threat of strike may be effective but once a strike begins and the workers lose their incomes there develops a situation of entrenchment on both sides which can be very difficult to resolve. Strikes can cause much hardship not only to the people concerned directly but to many others. For instance, if one walks down Townsend Street any day he will find long queues of elderly people waiting to be paid their pensions at the offices of the Department of Social Welfare. These good Dublin people should be able to draw their pensions in a civilised way. They should not have to submit themselves to the inconvenience and the indignity of forming long queues on a city street. They have had to wait there in some very bad weather. There is no blame attaching to the office. Pensions are paid speedily there but the Post Office strike is the cause of the situation.

There must be a better way of resolving all these difficulties. I have personal knowledge of the scene regarding the corporation men in the cleansing department who are on a go-slow. I know that these men have grievances. Their job is not a very nice one but it should be possible, with goodwill on both sides, to resolve their grievances. There are people in this city who have not had a refuse collection for almost three months. There is not very much that I can add to what has been said already both here and outside about the Post Office strike but I would appeal to all concerned to adopt a fresh approach to the problem.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair would prefer Deputies to refrain from dealing with specific cases.

Mr. Moore

On the industrial relations scene in general we could do better. The weaker sections are suffering most in the present situation. I am not denying that the various people on strike have grievances but these grievances must be resolved some day, so why not resolve them today rather than wait for another week or for another month? The Minister in his brief outlined the procedures for negotiations, procedures that have the approval of all sides. We are much too poor a country to allow a situation in which essential services are withdrawn for many months. If we consider the situation in West Germany, for instance, we realise that it is possible to have industrial peace.

I am confident that when the Minister is reviewing the organisation of the Labour Court he will find ways in which improvements can be made. Perhaps we could appeal to all sections at this time to continue working on the basis of interim increases in wages pending agreement on a policy to replace the national understanding. This would appear to be the best procedure for the moment. The cost of industrial strife must be frightening in terms of the economy. The people have become disenchanted, not with the Government but with the democratic system.

Democracy is on trial. We have to take the whole thing very seriously. Yesterday we learned with regret that the national understanding had been rejected. I do not think it is a disaster, but we have to face facts and accept the fact that it has been rejected. This has caused grave concern throughout the country. The newspapers today in their editorial comments take the matter very seriously. The Irish Press has the headline “Where do we go from here?” Indeed, I wonder where do we go from here unless we have a touch of realism and inspiration to get over this obstacle on the way to progress. The Irish Times said that the term “national understanding” was a gauche term. It goes on to deal in a sensible way with what happens now. The Independent says “In a country potentially well-doing....” Indeed, most of us are doing very well, but there are strange anomalies.

As I came in this morning I saw in the window of an employment service office an advertisement offering 50 jobs for women manufacturing jeans, the type of clothes worn by younger people nowadays. Happily, the employer was able to offer £70 a week, subsidised bus services and subsidised canteen facilities. I am delighted to note that that employer can do that, but we know very well that all employments are not as happy as that. When we talk about unemployment and we see that there is one place which offers 50 jobs right away surely we would all be far better off if the Government, the Department, the trade unions and the employers were examining the possibility of having many more industries like that in this city, because that employer shows what can be done with good management and with work of a high standard.

The last thing I want to refer to is the comment in the Cork Examiner. They ask “Who rules?” and say in general terms trade unions or big business. The point is that these bodies do not rule. They are components of our society, but they do not rule. In a democracy the Government rule. Democracy is the best system we know of. There is an onus therefore on everyone to realise that democracy cannot exist or prosper unless we take our share of responsibility. We should especially remember that, although those of us who have jobs may have problems also, there are many people who have not got jobs and we must always try to redress that situation. We are not going to be able to create employment unless we show that we are capable of attracting capital, first of all, and then showing that the expertise of the Irish worker is as high as anyone else's. What may put people off is the fact that some of our bizarre industrial unrest is certainly not conducive to good relations between the new employers and the workers. I know that if the Minister could find the answer to these problems he would be a very happy man indeed, but there is no short cut to industrial peace. It has to be achieved by every sector accepting its full share of responsibility. I would like to see a system whereby the men and women who work on the shop floor and the management at the top would be vying with each other to show how that concern could prosper.

When we talk about trade unions or the men and women who strike we also have to remember that inefficient management is very often to blame for some of the industrial unrest. It may be because we have a tradition built up from former times where many a person in management was not trained to be in management but simply had that job because it was an old family business. We know that the Government, through their agencies, spend vast amounts of money in grants to industrial and commercial undertakings to train management to a higher standard. Lots of firms avail of this but many firms do not or, having availed of the service, they do not learn very much.

We very often have procrastination in deciding a claim for better conditions and higher wages and we sow the seeds of industrial unrest. The Minister, in his speech, gave details of the help the Government give the Irish Congress of Trade Unions. I would not grudge one penny of that money. I think congress are trying very earnestly to improve matters on the industrial relations scene. They tried very hard indeed and with an expertise that is commendable. The fact that the national understanding was not accepted can be put down to many different factors. As I mentioned earlier, I was never a believer in making long-term agreements. Factors change so rapidly nowadays that short-term agreements would be far better, because in a year many things change and therefore a good agreement made today may not be so attractive in three months' time.

This is where the unrest starts. A man who gets an increase today is quite happy with it and takes it, but because of various factors he later becomes dissatisfied. Human instinct being what it is, he wants to improve his position. If he has a small house, perhaps he wants a larger house. If he has a small car, he wants a bigger car. Naturally, a man with a young family wants to give his children a better education than he had, so the demand for greater income goes on all the time. But we know very well that income of any type, whether it is dividends or, wages or salary, must be governed by what is available in the national pool. The classic economist always refers to the national cake. If the cake is only a small one, then each person will get only a small amount; but if it is baked much bigger, then there is more for all the people. That may sound like a cliché nowadays but it was very sound. It is to be hoped that certain old values, disregarded today, may soon return.

The late Deputy Seán Lemass asked for old-fashioned patriotism at one time. We could do with a little of that today. We have become more sophisticated since we joined the EEC; we think differently and we are going through change. However, the old values are still valid. One of the old values was that we always thought of the less well off people. Today many people draw pensions from across the Channel and are badly affected by the Post Office strike. I visited one such old lady recently and she complained bitterly that because of the present trouble she could not get her pension. I asked her how she managed to live and she said that she lived simply with the help of relatives and so on. Why must we inflict so much suffering on people in her circumstances? Surely with goodwill all round we could end a lot of today's industrial unrest and the sufferings brought about by it.

Before we had such a Department we all thought that a Department of Labour would be a great Department. It turned out that way, judging by the amount of work done each day by the Department of Labour. The majority of industrial disputes, those that do not go to the Labour Court, are solved. The shop steward is very important to industry, and trade unions run courses for shop stewards. As we become more industrialised the shop steward will assume greater importance in relation to communication between the shop floor and the employers. Because of that more facilities should be made available for the education of shop stewards to enable them to explain matters on the shop floor and to monitor the needs and grievances of the workers and have them dealt with at union-management level. The shop steward has recourse to a rights officer of the Department and I compliment the Minister on increasing the number of rights officers.

The Government introduced worker representation on boards, which I welcome, but the essential thing is to deal with problems already in industry. We should have well trained personnel on the union side and on the management side to examine each claim made by a worker. If a claim is just the shop steward should fight it to the very last but, if not, the shop steward should be in a position to explain why. A shop steward is happier if he can accede to the requests of an aggrieved worker. If he does not accede to the request, he loses face and popularity among the workers. The shop steward should be given every possible facility to do his job properly because he is a very important and in some cases the most important person in industrial relations. His counterpart in management should also be well educated in industrial and human relations. It is, essentially, human relations that are in question. There have been terrible examples of strikes which could have been avoided had there been the right approach from both sides. There was an incident many years ago of a genuine grievance among industrial workers in the city and the management either could not or refused to solve the problem. This went on for seven months and then the workers decided to strike, whereupon the matter was resolved within three hours. Workers learnt a lesson from that. If one wanted a fast decision on a claim, one took industrial action. That has been going on for a long time and has become the norm. Experience in recent years has shown that we must remedy that situation.

The Minister in his speech mentioned that there should be some kind of control on unofficial strikes. We must face the fact that it is very hard to prevent unofficial strikes. In my younger days, passing a picket was unthinkable. You just did not do it, even if the picket was unofficial. As one grew older one realised that refusal to pass an unofficial picket could inflict untold harm on other people. I speak with reservation when I say that we have not the blatant abuse of unofficial picketing here that they have across Channel. We heard stories of patients being sent home from hospital because of abuse of picket power. That has not happened here and I hope it will not, but there is always a danger if we do not get down to an examination of the industrial relations situation. We should strive to create a situation which will make for a better standard of living of all our people, particularly taking care of the very young and the very old.

I do not think I exaggerate when I say our industrial relations situation is our greatest problem. One is tempted to go overboard on the subject, but that would not serve any useful purpose. However, if we show our concern here in the national Parliament it may help to ease things throughout the nation. Deputies who are also members of Dublin Corporation have been inundated with requests to do something about the dustmen's strike in the city which is causing a serious problem to many people. There must be goodwill on both sides if that and other damaging disputes are to be settled.

The Minister for Labour has an onerous task but not as difficult as his counterpart across Channel. However, the man holding similar office in the West German Republic has an easy job even if he has to deal with many more millions of people. People who go to the continent on holidays notice particularly the high standard of living they enjoy there. They have their problems there but there is one thing you can say about them: they have a dedication to their work.

We have had a survey on Irish attitudes to work and I am afraid it was not very flattering to us. However, I have found that whether workers are in the boardroom or on the factory floor, they give of their best, despite what people say about us. In Dublin there is one industry which has not had a serious dispute in the past ten or 15 years. The reason is that they got down to consider their difficulties and they never let a dispute escalate into a strike. None of their disputes has lasted more than a couple of days and they have never disrupted essential supplies.

As I have said, there are many difficulties facing us as a nation, including the oil shortage, but the greatest problem we have is the unsettled state of our industrial relations. We could be doing far better industrially if we did not look on the strike weapon as the ultimate solution to workers' grievances. Too many people adopt the fatalistic attitude that only a strike will remedy grievances. I do not accept that. This morning on my way here I spoke to people on picket lines. I asked them for ideas on how their strike could be settled, but of course I am not an adjudicator. However, I understood from them that they want to be at work. They seem to have become entrenched in their present position.

I should like to suggest a way towards possible preliminary talks in disputes before they escalate. There should be an adjunct to the Labour Court which could examine certain industries and make suggestions for improvements so that the rewards of all involved in those industries would be greater. We must strive to get a sense of partnership in industry between boss and worker because what is good for one is good for all —they are all in it together and the prosperity of one will bring prosperity to the other. Nowadays we have people from shop floors on boards of directors and perhaps this might bring about improvement in the long term.

We should have a look at the number of trade unions we have. The last time I counted them there were 93 to cater for a very small work force. It may be said that we are a very individualistic race and that is why we have so many unions. Some of the 93 would be more like friendly societies than unions. In CIE there is almost a score of unions. We have demarcation disputes, or what are popularly known as the who does what strikes. We must have some rationalisation, but the move must come from the trade union movement. They are the people to examine the structures and decide what they should be.

There are also human problems. A man who is the secretary of a small union may be doing very good work and he will not look with relish at the prospect of being absorbed into a bigger union. The biggest union in the country have as their slogan, "One big union". Our aim should be to have a grouped industry with one union catering for it. This would be to the benefit of the members and it would prevent a lot of unnecessary warfare. There would be no sniping between the members.

Recently on a disastrous occasion in Limerick we saw absolute open warfare between two unions. I do not know the merits of that case, but the outcome of that dispute was not helpful. I know there were other factors which caused the industry to close. The situation in the trade unions needs to be rationalised. Effort and money are wasted in supporting too many unions. There is more than one employers' organisation, but they are very few. A lot of work is being done on this question at the moment. We have had some amalgamations of unions. This is to be encouraged. In this of specialisation we cannot afford to have so many unions.

It is understandable that there would be a certain amount of rivalry between unions, but we must reduce the numbers by agreement and by amalgamation. That is why I suggest we should group our industries, for example, the brewing industry, the baking industry, and so on, with their own unions. This would be much more effective. Recently we saw one firm on strike putting pickets on another industry which was connected in some way with it, thereby causing further disruption.

I know the Minister, the Department, the trade unions and the employers have many problems. I suggested earlier that we should have a permanent council or body in continual session examining industries. Claims could be vetted quickly and decisions given. I would look on it as an adjunct of the Labour Court. That would enable us to make great progress.

I should like to see better communications between all concerned in the industrial and commercial scene. We should be open with one another. The employers should realise that there is more to industry than making a profit. I believe in free enterprise, but free enterprise has responsibilities as well as privileges. The unions also have responsibilities as well as privileges. The State must try to bring the two together. The Minister is doing that to a great extent. I hope he will succeed and that this time next year when he presents his Estimate the industrial scene will be much more peaceful than it is now, and that there will be much less suffering in this city and in the country.

Mr. White

I am glad to have this opportunity to speak on the Estimate for the Department of Labour. The national understanding seems to be on very rocky ground. On the subject of strikes I should like to make some suggestions to the Minister about what he should be doing that he is not doing. Everybody agrees we are in a chaotic state. Over the past four or five months we have had nothing but strikes. We have the bin men on the streets. We have the postal and telecommunications strike. The banks are threatening to go on strike. We had the bus men on strike. In practically every section we have had strikes or people threatening to go on strike.

Anybody who is serious about the welfare of the country must consider the root causes of the failure of the Fianna Fáil Government. Anybody who has travelled through this city in the past couple of days must realise that, if the bin men's strike goes on much longer, a terrible health hazard will be created. I cannot understand why that strike has not been settled before now. If it lasts much longer we must suggest that the Army be brought in to ensure that a health hazard is not created in the streets of Dublin. The Minister and the Government will have to give very serious thought to this very serious problem.

In regard to the postal and telephone strike I cannot understand why the Minister for Labour or the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs has not met the people who have been on strike practically since the beginning of February. In counties like Donegal, Kerry, Mayo and Galway we have no telephones. We have no post. We have reached a critical stage in the life of every person in the western areas. Sometimes I wonder do the Government realise the hardship they are causing to thousands and tens of thousands of poor people living in those areas because of the inactivity of those two Ministers. This strike must end sooner or later. I appeal to the Minister for Labour, who is seen to be very inactive so far as these strikes are concerned, to meet these people and try to get a fair solution for all sides.

The next strike we are faced with concerns the punt and sterling. Nobody outside Ireland seems to be interested in the punt at present. I was talking to an Englishman last week who informed me that he had never seen a punt in his life. I went into a foreign bank that would not even change one. A money exchange bank offered me 50p for the punt.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy will appreciate that we cannot discuss sterling or the punt on this Estimate. The Minister for Labour has no responsibility for that. On strikes, when Deputies are dealing with industrial relations it is in order to mention them, but we cannot debate them. Most of these belong to another Minister's area; some may not belong to Ministers' areas at all.

Mr. White

I accept that. I was endeavouring to put things in perspective. I wished to explain what I shall talk about later on, in the short time allocated to me. The country is well aware of its dreadful state as far as strikes are concerned.

We have to see what causes the present unrest. For once, I agree with Deputy Moore who spoke earlier. I agree that the Minister will have to look at the number of unions we have here. For every organisation or craft we should have one union, one boss and one craft that that union represents. It is shocking to think that there are between 80 and 90 unions in a country as small as Ireland with a population of only 2,500,000.

The unions blame employers; the employers blame the unions; both sides should put their own house in order. The unions will have to decide that there are too many here in different industries, and come together. If they did come together, the workers would be better represented; it would be far easier to get on with the bosses, and productivity would increase.

The manpower offices are doing a tremendously good job. The Minister for Defence, when announcing the increases for the Defence Forces, appealed to young men to join the Army, the Naval Service and the Air Corps. He said, as I have said at different times, that we are short of young men in the armed forces at present. Young people should be encouraged and it should be explained to them that very good wages and conditions are available to people working in the armed forces. We have about 15,000 people working full-time in these forces, but the establishment is short.

I would suggest to the Minister for Labour that a recruitment drive should be carried on in all the manpower offices throughout the country. Many constituents come to Deputies, particularly those serving in a country area, looking for work in the county council, in factories or in different State organisations. Normally, we must refer them to the manpower office, which is a good thing. The manpower offices, however, are not tapping a large source of employment. This State is ready, willing and able to employ thousands of men in the armed forces. The Minister for Labour might take a note of this and see if this type of recruitment could be undertaken.

AnCO are one of the best semi-State bodies under the Department of Labour. They are tackling a difficult problem, which needs to be tackled. There are too many people in some crafts and not enough in others. We must increase the number of our technical colleges and expand them, and expand the role of AnCO.

The Minister for Labour recently, in the newspapers, invited Irishmen from abroad to come home and work here. We would welcome Irishmen back, but we should be tackling our own problem first. We should be tackling the figure of nearly 100,000 on the unemployment register and finding alternative employment for these people who find themselves in the unfortunate position of being on unemployment benefit or unemployment assistance. If these jobs which the Minister is talking about are available, surely some of our own unemployed could be retrained through AnCO? They should be given priority, as far as these jobs are concerned.

The fault does not lie with the people unemployed; they are not told about the alternative employment available to them if they are retrained. We need more education in this field. There should be notices in all the unemployment offices throughout the country, pointing out the jobs available here for people and the grants available to retrain them, if they would allow themselves to be retrained. When redundancies occur in a factory, it is easy to put oneself on the unemployment exchange register and to hope for a vacancy in a similar type of factory. The Minister should give a lot more thought to re-employing and retraining these people in the different walks of life.

It amazes me to find that the AnCO centres have no course available at which young agricultural students can learn modern forms of farming. I suggest to the Minister that, if what I am saying is correct, he would see to it that AnCO provide courses in modern methods of beef, pig and poultry production, and even marine biology courses could be included. Such courses would be of special benefit to people in midland and western areas. It is important that these people be properly trained. As this century goes on only people who are trained extremely well in farming and marine biology are going to be successful in this increasingly competitive market. A university course in marine biology covers something in the neighbourhood of three years, but perhaps six-month courses or even three-month courses could be arranged for small farmers in Connemara whose farms are at inlets of the sea to encourage the production of mussels, cockles and oysters and thereby increase employment.

AnCO are doing a good job but they must expand further into the different trades and occupations that suit rural Ireland particularly. It is all very fine to train bricklayers, television mechanics and so forth, but there are a lot of other types of jobs available here which cannot be filled because we lack people with the expert knowledge to fill them. I ask the Minister to have a look at this and if there are not AnCO courses to suit the farming community to see to it that such courses are introduced. Recently I visited a sheep farm and I realised that it would be news to most of us to learn that some modern sheep farmers throughout the world are trying to arrange that all the lambs will be born at the same time of the year. Ewes are picked which are expected to produce two or three lambs each and attempts are being made to get those ewes to lamb twice a year.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I appreciate that the Deputy is hanging this on courses in AnCO but to the Chair this seems rather like agriculture.

Mr. White

I am trying to emphasise the need for specialisation as far as AnCO are concerned. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle will agree that in giving examples occasionally I am not straying too far from the course. The point I am making regarding AnCO is that if young men were trained in these courses they could look to a very profitable market at present. That is all I have to say on that. I want to get that message across.

I have a criticism of AnCO. The ladies who are catering for the AnCO students at the different centres are not getting an adequate supplement for the full board which they supply. The Minister probably realises that the sum they are paid for bed, breakfast and evening meal and three meals a day on Saturday and Sunday is £17 per week per student and the students are in the age group 16 to 18 years roughly. In putting down a question to the Minister recently I told him that £17 per week was not adequate at this time. If we are going to train our students properly they must be boarded in good homes and given good food. To ensure that we must pay the landladies catering for the AnCO centres a fair sum. I ask the Minister to look into this.

I suppose it is not in order when discussing the Department of Labour to mention the terrible state in which we find ourselves on the western seaboard as far as strikes are concerned.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is quite in order in dealing with industrial relations and to mention strikes in passing, but most of the strikes that are being mentioned on this debate are not the responsibility of the Minister. However if they are mentioned in passing the Chair will not be too hard on the Deputy.

Mr. White

I want to make a point about the distressful condition in which we find ourselves, particularly in north-west County Donegal at present and I suggest that the Minister for Labour must take a lot of the blame for this because of his inactivity. We have no post, no phones and no petrol, and we are afraid of our lives that in the next couple of months we are going to have no tourists either. Tourists cannot post letters, we have no automatic dialling and they are afraid they will get no petrol. Therefore, the main industry in Donegal, tourism, is going to be extremely hard hit. I cannot understand that when travelling from Donegal to Dublin I can buy as much English petrol as I want—I must apologise for doing it—at 87p a gallon and when I come to this part of the country I cannot get any petrol at all. I do not want to dwell on the petrol situation.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That is very much a matter for another Minister.

Mr. White

As far as strikes are concerned, particularly in the west and the north-west, the four Ministers most responsible are the Minister for Economic Planning and Development—he has been called the Minister for disaster—the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy and the Minister for Labour, particularly the last because he has been given the responsibility of bringing peace and harmony to the various industries throughout the length and breadth of the country. It is not that he is afraid to talk; he is well able to do that on his own behalf, but over the last couple of months he has been remarkably silent as far as negotiations with different industries are concerned. The time is coming—as the Government will find in the next two weeks—when the people going to the polls will give the Minister for Labour and the other Ministers the answer they deserve for their inactivity throughout the entire industrial field.

Finally it is not only the Minister for Labour who has to take the responsibility. It is the entire Fianna Fáil Ministerial team, particularly the four I have mentioned. It is not so long since we saw the big slogan on the walls to the effect that Fianna Fáil would get the country moving again. People are beginning to ask if it is moving to a full stop on the total industrial scene. The entire nation—and certainly the entire county of Donegal—is grinding slowly to a halt. Each and every one of us eventually will have to pay for the total inactivity of the present Fianna Fáil Government and the disgraceful way in which they are running the country.

Mr. Briscoe

It is easy enough for the Deputy opposite, like so many people when they choose, to blame everything on the Government. No Government ever came into office with such a priority aim as this Government—the priority of creating jobs. I was appalled when I read the following article in this morning's Irish Independent:

A National Understanding was acceptable in principle to the ITGWU as a first step towards a planned economic and social programme— but not at the expense of unsatisfactory terms,...

The article went on:

This was stated by ITGWU vice-president Mr. John Carroll at yesterday's ICTU conference on the proposed National Understanding in Dublin. He told delegates that the terms proposed were not good enough and that his members had overwhelmingly rejected them.

He said also that the Government had ridden to power on the crest of a wave of promises, including the creation of full employment.

The absence of an agreed and acceptable National Understanding would not excuse the Government if it failed to go ahead with those measures which could be of value in dealing with our economic and social problems.

How can we implement our policies when there is no restraint?

Mr. White

Could we have a quorum to listen to Deputy Briscoe's speech?

Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted, and 20 Members being present,

Mr. Briscoe

The Government have spelt out that discipline is needed if they are to create jobs. The writer of one of today's leading articles pointed out that the offer made was extremely generous in view of the economic prospects facing us because of the current oil shortage.

The morale of the nation must be pretty low at the moment because of the non-acceptance of the national understanding. As the old saying goes, the darkest hour is just before the dawn; and I feel, coming from a long line of optimists, that we may well pull out of this.

The strife going on at the moment throughout the trade union movement is a great source of worry to people unconnected with that movement, the ordinary people in the street. One can realise the seriousness of the situation when we find that certain speakers at the delegate conference yesterday said that the Irish Congress of Trade Unions have now virtually no right to negotiate on behalf of individual unions. We have come a long way from when we had suffering masses of people. Only recently a Dublin Corporation colleague of mine, Labour Councillor Tom Duffy, shocked me when he told me that he well remembered a time in Dublin when one could see a man carrying a little coffin under his arm to bury a child in Glasnevin cemetery because that man could not afford to pay for the funeral expenses. In 1932 we had 18,000 families, numbering over 100,000 people, living from six to 14 to a room. We had the worst slums of any city in Europe. We have come a long way since then with our industrial growth. I know I may be a little bit out of order——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I am anxious that names of people, particularly of those outside the House, should not be mentioned. When you reminisce on the past do not mention names of people you are speaking about.

Mr. Briscoe

I thought it was all right when one was praising a person but not when one was knocking a person.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Someone might like to come in to do the opposite. It is only in special circumstances that we allow you to praise somebody outside the House.

Mr. Briscoe

The increase in prosperity in the last 50 years of what has always been known as the working class people far outweighs the wildest dreams of what James Connolly or "Big Jim" Larkin felt could possibly be realised. Our people have become one of the best fed nations in Europe, if not the best fed, according to United Nations' statistics. We have come from a poverty stricken nation to be a reasonably prosperous one. Are we to throw all this away because we cannot agree on an ordered wage agreement in which the less well off sections of the community can get their share?

I can understand the dilemma of the Minister and the Government in regard to people who do what are known as the dirty jobs, like dustbin clearance, sewerage works and so forth, who have always tended to be at the lower end of the scale. I have always wished to see the unions agree to a minimum wage, but they will not do so. I should like to see people recognise that there are some categories in regard to whom the unions should be able to agree among themselves that those people should get a certain sum of money because of the unpleasant nature of their work. I believe that people on all sides of the House are deeply concerned about yesterday's decision and the majority rejection. Is this a turning point in our economic progress? I do not believe it is. Will the Government be able to say that they are implementing this scheme, that the employers are implementing it and that those who are willing to avail of the national understanding can do so? Can the Government do that while others stay out of the national understanding?

A number of points about this matter were mentioned to me last night, but I did not see any of them mentioned in the newspapers today. Some working people found themselves disagreeing fundamentally with the national understanding in regard to the right to strike. They felt that by accepting the national understanding they would not have the right to withdraw their labour. Some suggested that there might be an employer who might try to make life very difficult for his employees when he knew they could not strike under the national understanding. I do not know how widespread that view is.

It is very disappointing that the national understanding was rejected because the first time the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and the employers came together with the Government in a parliamentary setting was at the press conference when the Taoiseach was able to announce that agreement had been reached. This is the first time we saw what appeared to be a fine partnership being established. It is a pity this has not been realised.

I have been told that the wages of people in the public service are not comparable with those of people in the private sector. I am told that certain skilled people in, say, the Office of Public Works, whether they be mechanics, bricklayers or whatever, will receive more working for a semi-State company or for a private builder, who may have to pay over the odds into the man's hand. Because they are in such short supply they can literally set their own price, and I understand that this is one of the reasons there is such a shortage. I am told that a bricklayer's wage starts at £63 in the public service while in the semi-State bodies it is £86. I do not know how accurate those figures are, but that is what I am told.

I want to refer now to the breakdown existing in communications between people, in some instances at management level and in others at floor level. Generally speaking we have good management/staff relations here, but in certain specific areas we do not have. One way of ascertaining if there are bad management/staff relations is to examine the labour turnover in a particular section to see if in one area over a period of, say, 20 years something of the order of 2,000 manual workers have changed, gone away or left the job to go somewhere else, and in another sector in, say, the same Department, only two or three people have left over a period of five or six years. I have in mind a particular section in a public Department I shall not name. The manpower service and various other agencies under the aegis of the Minister for Labour, when there are strikes taking place or when there is trouble in a firm, must ascertain what the labour turnover has been like: whether there have been good management/staff relations with a very low turnover. Sometimes wages might even be less, and we are talking about the minimum union rates. Everybody in this House today knows that if one wants to engage a person of certain skills, perhaps a bricklayer or somebody of that type, one must pay over the odds to get him. In Dublin Corporation we are experiencing tremendous difficulty particularly in getting bricklayers. These are the factors that must be taken into consideration.

We must examine our methods of conciliation. So far they have worked very well. I have heard so many people say "Why rock the boat?" Everything to do with labour relations, the conciliation in the Labour Court and so on, has worked very successfully. It has fallen down in a few instances only, and that but recently. Perhaps now is the time to carry out a review, but I am not in a position to know as much as the Minister about the instances I have quoted.

Perhaps the most important thing I have to say is that this Government have no intention of panicking. This Government will not lose their heads. The overall situation will be considered and reviewed. I am aware that there is great anxiety and insecurity at present; nobody denies that. I am satisfied that ultimately when the Taoiseach speaks to the people he will reassure them and they will feel confident about our future. I feel confident, though perhaps somewhat despondent. However, I am not lacking in confidence for the future. At times one feels lower than at others. There is nothing we want to see more than people happy, successful and in regular employment. I know it to be the Government view that people in steady employment, whose employment is not in jeopardy in any way, have a responsibility to those who are not in employment or to those who are in insecure employment.

Already the Fine Gael spokesman, Deputy Mitchell, has said that it is the view of his party that the 15 per cent offered under the national understanding was more than the country could afford. Yet it has been rejected. But, if more than this is sought, it will jeopardise employment in industry competing on world markets. We are all aware of this. This is the A, B, C of any lesson in economics. It is basic and we all know it. Nevertheless the Government feel it is people in secure employment who must show restraint. I should like to see some of these people coming forward. For example, I should like to hear the public service unions announce that they are in favour of this national understanding. I think most of us here are satisfied that, if instead of having a delegate conference to decide whether or not a national agreement be accepted, we had a referendum put to the people, there is no doubt that it would be carried overwhelmingly.

I am constantly meeting people—I am sure other Members are also—who say to me "You have a 20-seat majority. Why don't you govern?" I say to them "What do you want us to do? What should we do with our 20-seat majority? Do you want us to set up a sort of dictatorship and say we are going to do this, that or the other?" Let us be specific. What do they mean? Do they want us, as they have accused us of doing in the past, to use the jackboot? Is that what they want? We are a democracy, a responsible people, supposedly. I believe that basically we are, because I am confident that if this was put to people in a referendum it would be carried overwhelmingly. Democracy works only with the consent of the people. As a Government we can set down the guidelines only. We can only say "These are our targets. This is the way we have planned the growth of the economy. This will happen only if you co-operate with us". This is the only way. Otherwise you can open up the doors, let the dictators take over and spell it out, as has been done in other totalitarian states.

What frightens a lot of people is that people who are less than interested in our democratic way of life are chipping it quietly away. I know some of these people who have gone up for election, who have been overwhelmingly defeated, perhaps gaining 150 votes in a general election. The next thing one reads their names as certain trade union officials, not all but some of them. How do these people get so much power when the people rejected them outright? They then fly their names under a flag, saying what they are, for instance, the Communist Party of Ireland. How do these people get such influence? How are they allowed to have such influence? To come back to ourselves, what are we doing about it? We say to the trade unions: what are you doing about it? The trade unions say "This is our problem. You are not to interfere". It is the same with the Post Office Workers' Union. The present dispute is hurting me as much as anybody else, and it is hurting the postmen themselves, hurting them damned hard. I have had telephone calls from the wives of some of them. I know that if in the morning it was put to them—indeed if it had been put to them 13 weeks ago—they would have gone back. We are dealing with a splinter group. If the Coalition were in power the same would apply. I remember we had very bad strikes during the Coalition's term of office. The then Minister for Labour Deputy M. O'Leary, was flying around the world because he did not consider there was any urgency in settling the strikes. Now he is waving a banner in Kildare Street. Who does he think he is kidding?

We have witnessed the withholding of labour by maintenance men in Dublin Corporation. Rubbish is piling up on our streets. Regardless of who is in Government, if small militant groups see an opportunity coming up to election time—local, European or general—they call for a strike. They hope that by the time the election is held, the people will be so fed up with strikes that they will throw out the Government party members. This happened in Britain. If we as a Government give in to this kind of blackmail we will be letting down the Opposition as much as we are letting down ourselves and the people of Ireland. We must do things in an orderly way. If we give in to one group, at the next election five or six unions will call strikes. People will not want elections because they will lead to strikes.

We must be aware of all these things and know what is happening to us. We must know what we are doing. Are we tearing ourselves asunder? For three years we have been the leader in the European table. Our unemployment rate has been reduced; in two years we have almost doubled the income tax allowance for a married man; we have abolished rates on houses, car tax——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That does not arise on this debate.

Mr. Briscoe

I am trying to understand what has got into our people and is causing these strikes. I am not much help in suggesting solutions——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is in order in dealing with industrial relations. He must not bring in irrelevant matters.

Mr. Briscoe

Ironically the Minister is not here today because he is opening a new factory. We are still creating jobs. I do not know what is our image abroad because of these strikes but it cannot be good. I have yet to be convinced of the sincerity of the trade union movement in the job creation sphere, particularly after some of yesterday's statements. It will be interesting to see if any of John Carroll's colleagues will take him to task or if they will ignore him because of what he said. The are some fine men in the trade union movement. Harold O'Sullivan is a man for whom I have a great deal of admiration. He is a very straight-talking man. Ruaidhrí Roberts——

Mr. Horgan

On a point of order, is it in order for the Deputy to make personal references of this kind?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair has already dealt with that point. The people the Deputy mentioned are very much involved in the national understanding which is under discussion in this House. When people in the public eye are dealing with a matter which is being dealt with in this House, it is generally in order to mention them but the Chair would prefer that names were not mentioned.

Mr. Briscoe

I do not think the Deputy wants to see free speech in this House denied——

Mr. Horgan

I did not even mention the name of an individual in an earlier debate on this Estimate and I was sharply reprimanded by you because it might be construed as referring to a particular person——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I hope not sharply, but it depends on the circumstances. It would be much better if Deputy Briscoe did not mention the names of people outside the House. Where people are very much involved in a public issue, generally we allow their names to be mentioned.

Mr. Horgan

I will bear that in mind.

Mr. Briscoe

I believe Deputy Horgan is as concerned as I am that a national wage agreement be made, that we have orderly negotiations, that we do not have a free for all and that, as a trade unionist in Britain said, those with the biggest snouts do not get the most out of the trough. This is what can happen. We have seen small militant groups, with enormous clout, holding the country up to ransom. Usually the cry is to call out the Army to solve every situation. If we had the Army out permanently we might as well have a military State because the Army would be doing everything.

I do not believe anybody doubts the sincerity of this Government's wish to give people the dignity of a job. I am deeply concerned about our school-leavers and university graduates who are the future of the country. The present situation must be resolved very soon. It is essential that agreement is reached as quickly as possible because we could witness a situation where these young people will be forced to go to other countries where their skills will be appreciated. This means we will have what is known as the brain drain.

From reading the Minister's speech no one can fail to be impressed with the kind of attention that is being given to our young people whose future is in jeopardy. If things go very badly, people in employment might not be so secure. If factories close because of unreasonable demands, those people will be on our dole queues and will no longer pay tax. People in the public service may find one day that there is no money to meet their cheques because the kitty has run dry. Running a country is like running a business. It must be properly managed. One can only spend what one is getting in. One can only borrow if one has assets, if the growth rate is right. The EEC banks may say that they have looked at our economy, that our growth rate is good, that our job creation is all right and that they would give us what we want, but we have never had the philosophy of borrowing to meet our social welfare payments. Primarily we borrowed money to create jobs and we do not want to be burdened even further by servicing these loans by more borrowing. All this relates to the acceptance or non-acceptance of the national understanding. I believe the difficulties will be resolved; the alternative is unthinkable and I cannot conceive of anything other than ultimate acceptance.

There are various bodies who would like the Minister to intervene in their disputes. If he does so in one case he will be required to intervene in all disputes and ultimately we will have a Minister for strikes. The unions and working people do not want this. My constituents have rubbish piled outside their doors and in other areas people are using their cars to take away their rubbish.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is in order to mention strikes in passing, but not to go into detail on any specific strike. Many of the strikes mentioned are not the responsibility of the Minister present.

Mr. Briscoe

Nevertheless, people who do not know any better want someone to settle strikes and the person mentioned is always the Minister for Labour, even though it is not part of his responsibility.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy should understand I am not preventing him from referring to strikes but he should not go into detail.

Mr. Horgan

On a point or order, may we have a House to hear the Deputy talking about strikes?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is Deputy Horgan asking for a quorum?

Mr. Horgan

I am.

Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted, and 20 Members being present,

Mr. Briscoe

I am sorry that Deputy Horgan has seen fit to call for a quorum. I hope he does not disagree with anything I have said. We all want our country to continue along the road of progress and I am sorry he has interrupted me in this manner. I hope when he speaks that he will be equally sincere in facing up to the problems which confront us. I had thought he was above that kind of behaviour.

In his opening speech the Minister referred to the fact that we had achieved so much in so little time with the setting up of various types of youth employment schemes. He stated:

The proposals for a national understanding which subsequently emerged provide that if a significant shortfall in these targets seems likely a special joint public and private sector employment programme will be launched up to a ceiling of 5,000 jobs.

This was welcomed by the unions as a sign of the Government's intention to back up their promises with real action. These 5,000 jobs—and possibly many more—may well be in jeopardy; I do not know. I do not want to be a Jeremiah and I remain optimistic. The people need reassurance and they will get it. Ultimately sense will prevail.

The Minister mentioned the proposal to set up a national hire agency. I welcome this. They will employ people as required and supply services to firms for appropriate fees. The agency will take over the job sometimes carried out by small private agencies. This is an excellent scheme, the need for which has often been mentioned in the past. The Minister said that the problem of providing suitable work for young people demanded a many-sided response involving the co-ordination and integration of policies ranging across many areas of activity. Of course that is so. It is an extremely complex matter involving, among others, the Departments of Education, Social Welfare and the Environment. In the co-ordination of the efforts of the various Departments concerned great care must be taken because even in this kind of work there are certain demarcation lines. The Public Service can be very jealous of anybody encroaching on their territory but in this case all concerned are working together.

The much maligned employment action team must be congratulated on the success of their efforts. The participation in 1978 of 6,400 young people in this scheme justifies the setting up of the group and the types of schemes they implement. There was reference to the work experience programme in respect of which there is a target for this year of 6,000 placements. This represents a 100 per cent increase and is further proof of the Government's sincerity in their undertaking to work towards full employment. There has not been any deviation from that aspiration but the success or otherwise of this target will depend on the response during the coming weeks from the various sectors.

The Minister has told us that of the 3,000 people who were engaged in last year's work experience programme 500 have taken up permanent employment, If these young people had not been engaged in work under this programme last year they might not have been able to find the kind of jobs that they are in now. They might have got out of the work habit and work is a habit. One can get out of it as quickly as he can get into it. One's confidence can be shattered by the inability to find a job. This is another reason why this work experience programme is to be commended.

I am glad to be able to tell the Minister that in Dublin Corporation we are availing fully of all the grants available from the environment improvement scheme. There is an excellent team of officials in our community and environment departments who are ensuring that the maximum use is made of this scheme in Dublin. This year many grant-type schemes will be implemented. For instance, work will be carried out along the Grand Canal and the Royal Canal areas which need a big facelift. This will give young people something to do during the summer months and it provides us with the opportunity of clearing up parts of the city and parts of the country also which need attention.

The Minister has told us that on the employment scene the increase in the manufacturing area at the end of September 1978 was 5,600 compared with September 1977. This is quite an achievement so far as the manufacturing industry is concerned because many of these concerns are mechanised to such an extent now that they require only a minimum number of workers. Some of them might provide jobs for 20, 30 or 40 people. Naturally we are anxious to have factories that would give employment to much larger numbers but the increase of 5,600 in the work force in that area is substantial.

We have been told that at the end of December last there were 7,000 more people employed than was the position at the end of 1977 and this increase was at a time when the unemployment figures were increasing in the other countries of Europe. This was the only country in which the figures were reducing. It is worth referring to the increase of 43 per cent in the number of vacancies notified to the National Manpower Service compared with the figure for 1977. As the Minister said, this fact should be sufficient answer to Opposition suggestions that unemployment decreases were due to emigration. However, it would be regrettable if this trend in the unemployment situation were to suffer a setback as a result of an irresponsible attitude in wage bargaining or in a failure to come to terms with what is realistic in terms of wage and salary increases.

The Minister has referred also to work sharing. It will be interesting to watch for developments in this area but in a climate in which so many people appear to want all and not to wish to share with anyone what they have, this aspiration may present problems. The trade unions have indicated their willingness to examine the prospect of work sharing, but I should like them to go further and to encourage work sharing, to work positively in this direction. Because of the experience we had recently when we witnessed people clamouring for their own way, the work sharing concept may seem rather vague.

Regarding the placement service of the National Manpower Service it is good to hear that the number of placement officers has been increased from 52 to 122. I suggest to the Minister that he consider using some of the community information offices for this service. These offices have a direct link with the National Social Service Council. In my area in Crumlin we have an office of the Department of Social Welfare so that people need not go to Aras Mhic Dhiarmada for information. Also, I think we are unique as a community information office in that we have made the premises available to elected representatives of all political parties for the purpose of holding clinics. I believe it would be welcomed if placement officers from the Department of Labour were to visit there once or twice a week to give information to the people in the area. We are talking about a catchment area of 25,000 or 30,000 people. It may in fact be more than that because people from Ballyfermot would also come in there although the Department of Labour may have their office up there. Community information offices are something which might be looked at.

I hope I have been constructive. I hope that what I have had to say is useful. I hope that I am right and I do not doubt the sincerity of people in this House when they say that they do not want to see this country being run into the ground by a few militants. We have to stand together in this independent democracy.

Mr. Fox

Speaking on this issue one must be conscious of the disruption that has been caused to our society today by various occurrences which would seem to be the result of affluence rather than of need. The greatest disruption in our society today is the Post Office strike. In referring to this strike one must ask several questions. We were not faced with disruption of this type during the Coalition period of office. In fact, during that period the members of that union seemed to be out of communication with their leaders in relation to wage increases. They seemed to fall behind in relation to other sectors which seemed to progress. The members of this branch of the labour movement did not seem to be properly consulted and properly looked after by the leaders of their unions.

I would ask: is the same thing happening here today? The people who are out marching on pickets have no joy in that. I have absolutely no doubt that they are not happy walking up and down on picket lines. I wonder indeed are the union leaders in communion with their members and is there proper communication between the executive of these unions and the members on the ground? Certain sectors have been underpaid and the Minister has acknowledged this. The attempt by this Government to bring this strike to an equitable conclusion is not being reflected in certain positions being taken by people in very powerful positions in this movement. Who is being hurt in this situation? We are all being hurt by it. The people concerned on the ground are being hurt. The small businessman is being hurt. Indeed, the national economy is being hurt. Are the union leaders being hurt? I ask that question very seriously. Have these people who are really responsible for it got a vested interest in making sure this position continues?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I am sorry to interrupt the Deputy so early in his speech. It is in order, in dealing with industrial relations, to mention strikes but not to debate them. I would ask the Deputy to remember that rule. There is no problem about mentioning particular strikes but to go into detail on them would not be in order and the Post Office strike is a matter for another Minister and not for the Minister for Labour.

Mr. Fox

I should like to express sympathy with those who are waiting for their allowances to come through, with mothers who are waiting for their children's allowances, with people who should be in receipt of communications from relatives abroad. I hope that sanity will come back into the whole spectrum of communications here. I would hope that some degree of objective progressive thought would be brought to bear by the people responsible in the various sectors of our industrial bodies to make sure that the national understanding, which is so comprehensive in its nature, will be given a second chance and be given an opportunity to bring this country forward on the road to full employment on which we started out so bravely when elected in 1977.

There is absolutely no doubt that the responsible attitude of this Government is not being understood or reciprocated by certain sections of our community. There is absolutely no doubt that the framework which we as a Government have instituted and put at the disposal of this country is not being utilised for the progressive benefit of everybody in our society. We in this Government have initiated many measures for the opening up of employment opportunities for our school leavers, for the young people coming on to the labour market. We have brought in industries of a very high quality. We have created employment opportunities and educational opportunities to take advantage of these industries coming in and to give our people an opportunity that they have never had in our history before. There are more opportunities available here today than have ever been available in the history of the island, and it is a pity that the comprehensive nature of the Government's initiatives is not being acknowledged and taken up by certain selfish sections of a small portion of the labour movement leadership who appear to be out of touch with their members on the ground.

If the initiatives this Government have brought about were understood, the acceptance of them would mean a better life for everybody. It would mean a better prospect of employment for the young people coming out of school. It would mean a better life for the infirm, the old and for the people in work. Unless we have a total commitment to the progress of our country by everybody in it, we are going to continue to have disruption. It is a pity that this recognition of our dependence on one another, which this Government are very much aware of, is not more widespread. If one section of the community decides to step out of line with another, then in the complex society in which we live no legislation can say that we must do something because somebody else is being hurt. There has to be a recognition by everybody in our society that disruptive tactics are going to have a very serious effect on people. Those originally taking the action may not be aware that they are hurting other people and that the disruption which is taking place in our society at the moment is hurting virtually everybody. It is a great pity that a sense of responsibility is not being exercised by certain people who should know better.

The opportunities here at the moment are unparalleled in our history. It is our own fault if they are not grasped. The European market for various goods is vast. There is no question now of finding markets for goods; the markets are there. If we can produce the goods, we must do so. We must move into line with the very best in Europe and we must have parity with European services, standards and wages. There is no doubt that we are moving in that direction. By and large our costs are a lot less than European costs and in some cases our wages are at least of European standards and above. So the catch-cry that wages have got to be in line with European wages is often false because very often our salary scales are in line with the best in Europe. Very often our costs, particularly in relation to housing, are very much less than those obtaining in Europe. So it is a very objective fact that the standard of life which we have here is in many cases better than that obtaining in many European countries. It is a pity that this fact is not recognised and that it is not got across more clearly to our people. There is no point in saying that one has to have a very large salary if one's housing costs and living costs are very much lower and one's large salary is going to create conditions of difficulty in other sectors. We have a balance here that has worked very well and if we can get ourselves back to an even industrial keel, there is no doubt we can forge ahead and be European leaders and indeed world leaders. There is a real need for a return to sanity and for a new national spirit of commitment so that our national understanding can be made to work for the benefit of all the people.

Mr. C. Murphy

I was with the Minister for Labour this morning at the opening of another AnCO training centre in Cookstown Industrial Estate. It was a pleasure to see here the opportunities and training facilities offered to young people. AnCO training centres are more than a half-way house between the schools, the unemployment queues and work. A spirit of happiness permeates the centre, and hope for employment at the end. The spirit there is somewhat different from the spirit abroad within society at the moment. In that training centre there is an evident bond between the workers: there is hope for something at the end of what perhaps has been to many a very trying time. I wish this industrial estate every success and I also wish the new AnCO training centre every success.

AnCO gives training in many of the basic skills, such as carpentry, metalwork, driving and so on, which are required to continue to build the modern Ireland and to make progress. It is gratifying to note that there has been increased money for AnCO from the European Social Fund to enable them perform their duties.

I also wish the new centre to be established in Loughlinstown every success, and I regret that to date we have not been able to establish a centre in North Wicklow, where land is the problem. We must continue to make every effort to obtain a suitable site so that an AnCO centre can be established in Wicklow to provide for the young people there.

We are all aware of the wonderful work done by the staff and management of AnCO. It is great to think of the excellent take-up of the people who go through the AnCO courses. While visiting the Cookstown centre I met some employers who told me that they had employed graduates from the various training centres and they were very pleased with their performance. Some of them said that they will return to AnCO for further employees. For these reasons I should like to see the establishment of more AnCO centres throughout the country. They are an essential part of our overall development.

When one looks at the general gloomy atmosphere in society one fails to see the spirit of hope and trust that is evident in the training centres. In industrial relations it appears that a certain few are trying to manoeuvre things towards their way of thinking. It is vital for us to achieve a proper spirit of co-operation between workers, unions, management and the Government if we are to develop. We also need mutual tolerance. No sector is perfect and each sector must try to perfect itself. It is only in this way that we can get an overall concerted approach. It would be great if there was a spirit of co-operation, mutual tolerance and understanding within society as a whole. At the moment various groups seem to be afraid that they will be left behind and will lose out—they are scrambling for identification. With co-operation and tolerance, we could achieve an organised approach which would benefit all.

The previous speaker, Deputy Fox, referred to the weaker sections of the community that are being caught up and are suffering from industrial disputes. It is to be hoped that the industrial dispute referred to will soon be settled, not alone in justice to the people in the dispute but in justice to the employers and others involved. It would be relatively simple to settle a dispute at an enormous cost to another sector, but that is not on. We are all dependent on each other and part of a chain, and when one link in the chain breaks, disharmony and suffering follow. The widows, the old and the poorer sections of the community generally are the people who suffer most. It is the Government's responsibility to ensure that each sector progresses, that no one is left behind and that strikes must be a last resort.

Present strikes are symptomatic of our present society. Each day in the newspapers there are headlines in relation to strikes and possible strikes. This all adds to the gloom and to lack of trust and confidence. Different sectors feel that they must make some sort of an impact and must compete in the overall situation.

What we should strive for is a cooperative spirit, an awareness by all of the problems affecting the community. We have had examples, unfortunately, of persons in management being inadequate for one reason or another, resulting in job losses. Therefore, one of our aims should be to try to improve our management structure.

We are inclined to speak of statistics, of numbers who are unemployed, but I often wonder whether we reflect sufficiently on the fact that each number represents an individual with his or her cares, anxieties, worries. I wonder if we reflect sufficiently on the effects of strikes on the dependants of participants. Most people in our society like to see their neighbours doing well. This is illustrated particularly in times of disaster. It is a pity that such feelings of neighbourly concern do not always come forward in the field of industrial relations. I have met many people on strike, I have met their dependants, and all of them have told me they did not want such a situation—all of them would have preferred harmony in their work-place as well as in their homes.

We are all anxious for full employment but there are people pursuing claims to unachievable ends to the detriment of the entire community, particularly to those out of work. Driving recklessly towards an unattainable end not only does not help anybody but damages the entire community. There must be realism and moderation.

Therefore, there must be a balanced approach in our industrial relations if we are to achieve the excellent aim of full employment. I am glad to be a member of a party who have had the courage to set a full employment target and to do everything possible to achieve it. At the moment, in times of great leisure from work, people cannot enjoy that leisure because of lack of security at work. That security would lead people to greater creativity and inventiveness during leisure. I particularly do not like to hear a man in a job say to a man who has not got a job "You have so much time". I was in a position once when I had a lot of time but I found I became completely disorganised without any form of lifestyle. A society can thrive only when there is a good balance between work satisfaction and leisure. I sincerely hope for a situation when all will strive towards such a balance.

Full employment is an ambitious goal for any Government. I welcome the National Hire Agency and wish them success. It is a novel approach to our conditions, but the setting up of the agency shows an earnestness on the part of the Government to achieve full employment. I note that the agency will be the employers of the people on their books and that the agency will be responsible for payment of wages, social security contributions and other workers' commitments.

I look forward to seeing it actively involved. I am glad the Minister is anxious to establish it at the earliest possible date. Sometimes it takes a long time for legislation to come before the House. The Minister has decided, pending the enactment of legislation, to establish a limited company to perform the functions of the agency. That is an excellent idea. I look forward to seeing the National Hire Agency performing many roles and many functions.

I have had many contacts with school teachers and principals. I am glad it has become easier—I am not saying very easy; I am not saying there are not still difficulties—for young people to obtain employment. Three or four years ago it was extremely difficult. While the situation has eased somewhat, it has not eased sufficiently. It is vital that our young people can get their right, the right to a job. Some very useful schemes have been introduced by the Department of Labour, the Department of the Environment and the Department of Education to provide employment.

The environmental improvement scheme which is administered by the Department of the Environment operates in conjuction with the Department of Labour. This scheme not only offers work of a certain duration to young people, but it also enables young people to have a direct input and commitment to the improvement of their society. Young people are idealistic. Community leaders often speak about how desirable it is to have playing fields and parkland available to the community. People see a piece of waste ground and ask why cannot the local authority tidy it up for the benefit of the community.

This is where the environmental improvement scheme comes in and plays a very important role in the employment of young people. They can see on their very doorstep small amenities which have been created for the benefit of the community and they can look at them with pleasure and say: "I worked to establish that, and now the community can benefit". The title "environmental improvement scheme" is a good one. Last year some of these schemes were curtailed or abandoned because of an industrial dispute. I hope that will not occur this year and that communities will be able to achieve their goal and their ambition.

The work experience programme is another venture by the Department of Labour. It is useful in that it offers a young person the opportunity to gain experience of industrial life. The gap between the classroom and the factory floor is enormous. Teachers should be better acquainted with what happens on the floor of a local industry. The work experience programme is a step in that direction. Much more could be done. Very often people work in cells or in units. Teachers try to educate and lead young people without having regard to where they will have to go to get employment. There should be greater co-ordination between the classroom and the local industry. This is a vital part of the education of young people. I should like to see a greater involvement in that direction. It is possible, but it would take a lot of organising at both levels. I welcome the work experience programme and hope that it can be enlarged.

Minister for Labour (Mr. G. Fitzgerald)

I want to thank Deputies who contributed to the debate on the Estimate for the Department of Labour last Thursday and today. This Estimate represents almost a doubling of the amount of money made available two years ago and should have attracted greater interest than was shown at some stages. The opening speaker for the Fine Gael Party, Deputy Mitchell, showed no great interest in the content of my opening contribution. He screamed and roared and offered no concrete solutions or suggestions in the areas to which he referred.

Deputy Desmond was the opening speaker for the Labour Party. His was a very reasoned, thoughtful and constructively critical contribution. He showed an interest in my speech and in the many fields of activity in which the Department are now involved. He referred at some length and in some detail to the agencies of the Department and to the Department. I want to thank him for a well reasoned and constructive contribution.

Debate adjourned.