There are 85 minutes left for this debate, 45 minutes for the Opposition and the two Members present will need to decide between themselves. On the other Estimates we were dividing the time equally but Deputy O'Toole had already an innings on this.
Supplementary Estimates, 1980. - Vote 42: Industry, Commerce and Tourism (Resumed).
Debate resumed on the following motion:
That a supplementary sum not exceeding £13,866,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December 1980, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism, including certain services administered by that Office, and for payment of certain subsidies, grants and grants-in-aid.
—(Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism.)
What I had in mind was that, in the division, I would speak for about seven minutes; Deputy Ryan and Deputy Hegarty wish also to take part of the time.
The Minister has 25 minutes to reply, which leaves almost 60 minutes.
As the Minister has said, we are back to the nuts and bolts. When leaving them last week, I referred briefly to the problems which now confront us despite the best efforts of the IDA to try to break the log jam which is now causing severe unemployment. The Minister for Education, in winding up, referred to the faith which the Fianna Fáil Government have in our youth, which was expressed in the amount of money now being poured into education. However, faith without good works is of little use. What is needed now is some emergency approach by the Government in the form of a positive reaction to the present diabolical state of the economy which is causing severe hardship to many thousands of people.
The Irish Goods Council, which comes under Subhead P, are doing very fine work and they are to be complimented on the campaign which they have spearheaded in relation to the purchase and sale of Irish-made goods in the Guaranteed Irish campaign. They are also to be complimented on their efforts to promote import substitution. However, despite their best efforts and despite the fact that the IDA will reach their target of job creation this year, we are still losing ground. It is not good enough for the Government to say that they have introduced specific measures to meet the needs of the time. The measures which have been introduced do not seem to be having the corrective effect they were meant to have. The most lamentable statement I have seen in a long time was made by the former Minister for Labour, who is now Minister for Finance. A week ago, when commenting on the latest unemployment figures from the CSO, he stated that the impact of those provisions showed that matters were improving. How can they be improving with an increase in the unemployment figure of 4,000 people for the month of November? When any Minister can stand up and say that, speaking on behalf of the Government, we have reached a lamentable stage.
With regard to subhead R.1, I note that we are in excess of £40 million under this subhead. During the election campaign of 1977 a Fianna Fáil Minister in the first week in June went on the radio and stated that the existing level of subsidy was inadequate and that on assuming office Fianna Fáil would ensure that subsidies on essential food items would be increased. The subsidies at the time that man was speaking were £66 million. Inflation then was not as high as it is today. That particular Minister was party to a decision to reduce, and in some cases abolish, subsidies on essential items. Subsidies no longer seem to be a priority with the Government, despite the fact that they always tell us it was they who campaigned, when we were in office, to have subsidies introduced because of the hardship caused by high inflation. We have now had a high inflation rate for approximately three years. Inflation is at the level where Fianna Fáil Ministers maintained subsidies should be introduced.
The theory behind subsidies is a very sound and logical one. If you have high prices causing severe hardship to the lower paid and people in receipt of social welfare benefits and allowances, the application of subsidies reduces hardship for them. It also helps to reduce the cost of living which in turn, helps to reduce the high wage demands made during a high inflationary period. High inflation reduces our competitiveness abroad. The logic of that kind of progression makes sense to me but the Government, who pride themselves on putting enough pressure on us to have subsidies introduced in the first place, are now in the position where they could increase subsidies. I am not surprised at this as it is not the first time we have seen promises broken and a gullible electorate left disappointed with promises made by Fianna Fáil at election time.
A very large number of our people depend for their livelihood on industrial production and many of our people are now leaving the land to seek employment elsewhere. Now that the traditional escape route for those people is closed, it is incumbent on the Government to look at this problem and to do something to relieve the seriousness of our economic position. I assure the Minister that those problems will not go away. We hope that an upward trend in international economic affairs will occur some time, but we cannot go on forever as we are. Unless we have some plans to take advantage of that when it happens, we will be left behind. The people who are now suffering will have to suffer for a longer period because of the inadequate inputs by the Government to ensure that they are looked after and something done for them in this emergency situation.
I should like to deal, under Subhead A1. with the Office of the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism and with the activities of the present holder of the office. The Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism is second in importance only to the Minister for Finance. He has a great responsibility in relation to our people. His top priority must be the creation of further employment through greater national investment in industry. We are facing, according to well-informed sources, a very serious time next year. The unemployment situation is very serious and is escalating. The reports we are getting are even more dismal and indicate a rise to a disastrous figure of 150,000 unemployed by the end of 1981.
As a layman I can see that our economy is in chaos and the unemployment crisis, together with the state of the economy, is the greatest challenge yet to the Minister and his Department. If we are to make any impact or stem the tide of the unfortunate escalation of unemployment predicted by the experts there is grave need for a substantial increase in national investment in industry. While I agree that the IDA have made substantial gains in job creation, despite this the net result for the past two years has been that job losses have been greater. Nineteen eighty-one will be a year of great challenge to the Minister and his Department.
As an Opposition back-bencher I feel that the present incumbent of the office has an abysmal record. His abject failure on price control is second to none in our history. He seems completely indifferent to the savage onslaught on living standards because of the ever-increasing cost of living. This is an area of grave responsibility for the Minister. In 1977 the rate of increase was in the region of 7 per cent. In 1978, it had reached 13 per cent; in 1979, 20 per cent, and it is expected that a similar figure will be reached this year. Unfortunately there seems to be no light at the end of the economic tunnel to indicate any defusing of this explosive situation. In the past few days we have heard of substantial increases in the pipeline.
In my budget contribution last year I said that the budget was a timebomb, the main ingredient of which was a substantial and highly explosive petrol increase which in time would create a massive conflagration in the cost of living standards, an erosion of living standards, substantial unemployment and industrial unrest. My predictions were unfortunately very correct. In the space of over two-and-a-half years we had in the region of a 50 per cent increase in the cost of living. This is a frightening prospect as we face 1981. How can one blame the industrial work force for the unrest that is there?
The Deputy is getting into a field that would be more relevant to tomorrow's debate. There is nothing in this Estimate for the Prices Commission. I am giving the Deputy every latitude.
I am trying to emphasise the Minister's role, or lack of it, in the area of price control.
There is nothing in the Supplementary Estimate about price control.
Am I not entitled under subhead A1 to refer to the Minister's salary?
The Deputy can only refer to the salaries or increases in wages and salaries.
The Minister's salary is included in that and it is under that heading I am speaking.
The Deputy cannot develop any point on salaries. That has been a ruling of the Chair during the years.
Even though it is under the subhead?
There would have to be something in it for the Prices Commission. I have given the Deputy the opportunity to raise it tomorrow. It would be more relevant to tomorrow's debate.
I am at variance with the Chair. If a subhead indicates salaries and the salary of the Minister is included, surely I am entitled to discuss his performance?
No. We cannot debate administration at all on a Supplementary Estimate.
It is a misleading subhead.
The Deputy can discuss wages and salaries.
I presume I can refer back to the 1973-1977 era, I well remember that the Minister, our new Minister for Finance, and a TV entertainer and Fianna Fáil preacher, Mr. Frank Hall, recently defrocked, since the advent of the Taoiseach, succeeded in their efforts in the House, on television and through many of their established consumer bodies to create an image for the Minister for Industry and Commerce of the time as "the Minister for Rising Prices". After three-and-a-half years the day of criticism is at hand for the present holder of the office because of his inefficient handling of the cost of living. With all due respect, I would describe him as the Minister for raging inflation. Housewives and people generally would readily accept this description.
There is no price control. I regret to say that in the past year the Minister seems to have ignored the situation completely. Prices have got completely out of control. The Minister made a statement in America to the effect that we were pricing ourselves out of the world market. This was an inference I resented, because it was intended to convey that it was workers and their demands for increases that had priced products out of the world market. The Minister has a responsibility to control prices and he is not doing so and it is time to put this on record.
During the four years we were in Government I listened to the present Minister and present Minister for Finance swinging out of the rafters and decrying the then Deputy Justin Keating as "The Minister for Rising Prices". Now, after two and a half years, the cost of living has risen by 50 per cent.
We will leave it for tomorrow's debate.
Under subheads F.1 and P, I should like to refer to the Irish Goods Council, to Mr. Murray and his executives and compliment them on the efforts they are making to enlighten the people on their responsibilities to support the Buy Irish campaign. Without the support of the people there will be further unemployment because many of our traditional industries have already gone to the wall—footwear, textiles and furniture. All this is because of a terrific invasion from the EEC and Third World countries into our home market. Unfortunately the major portion of our retail trade has been taken over by multi-nationals who have little regard for the country, the people, the economy, or the worsening unemployment situation.
To ensure a successful Buy Irish campaign the Minister should, without delay, emphasise the need for a Sell Irish campaign. The shelves in many of the multi-national supermarkets and hypermarkets carry about 90 per cent non-Irish produce brought in from all over the world. The promise in 1977 was to improve, expand and develop our food processing industry. Surely when we go into supermarkets and see such a vast proportion of their stock imported we must do something about it. The Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism should make every effort to develop the Sell Irish campaign. Those people have no interest in us and it is therefore up to us to ensure that what is put before the consumer is the good produce of native industry.
I appreciate that some of our produce is inferior and that one cannot expect the housewife to buy an inferior Irish product if a better imported item is on general sale. There should be a relationship between the IIRS and the Irish Goods Council so that they could work together. We want to sell our goods at home as well as abroad and we want to be able to buy best quality Irish goods, and here the IIRS have a big role to play.
I should like to compliment the IDA on their efforts overseas to inveigle and to invite major industries to come in here. In particular I compliment the outgoing chairman. Mr. Michael Killeen, on his years of effort, on his contribution to the development of Irish industry. I and all sectors of the community are sorry to see him go. I doubt if it will be possible to improve on his efforts.
I have referred to the terrible crisis in Irish industry and to the employment position. Today we heard about the £157 million made available to complete this year's programme. In 1981 that figure will have to be increased by at least 50 per cent so that there will be an investment of at least £250 million to ensure that the terrible scourge of unemployment will be challenged, slowed down and ultimately defeated. This year 40,000 new jobs were created and I was delighted to learn that 10,000 of them are in the smaller firms.
I congratulate SFADCo, who had the foresight to recognise the expertise among local industrialists. Together they have been able to assess prospects for future development in factories with work forces of 50 people each. I am most concerned that we should have development of native small industries employing between 50 and 100 people. If a big industry is closed in a small town it is a major calamity but if one of a number of small industries fails it has not the same effect and it is possible to find alternative work for those disemployed.
In SFADCo, Mr. Quigley and his staff have done marvellous work for the midwest region. Indeed I should like to pay tribute to the local officers who work in the towns and villages and I would say a special word in praise of Tom O'Donnell——
It would be better if you did not. Somebody else might come in later to attack him.
He is beyond reproach and his concern for the development of small industries cannot be faulted. His efforts have resulted in a big increase in employment and I compliment him. As I said earlier, I welcome the efforts of the IDA to bring in major industries but sometimes I worry that a day may come when we will have such industries shut down because of decisions taken abroad. I advocate encouragement for the Irishman who is prepared to invest to develop industries at home.
SFADCo, as I have said, have gone from strength to strength in my region and I should like to see their efforts copied in other parts of the country, complementary with the efforts of the IDA.
There has been reference to the bread subsidy of £14½ million, but the time is appropriate for the reintroduction of the total food subsidies which were available in 1977, because at the moment the housewife is under extreme pressure from day to day increases in food prices. It is because of this pressure that trade unions, through the national pay talks, endeavour to ease this pressure. As we approach 1981 the Government must show their concern for the underprivileged, the lowly paid, by reintroducing the food subsidies in full and I propose to the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism that he will fight for this at budget time. Deputy O'Malley has energy in the field of industrial development and I should like to see him use some of it in the field of price control.
I do not intend to cover ground already covered by Deputies Ryan and O'Toole. My main topic will be tourism, but before I come to that I compliment the IDA for their foresight in acquiring land at reasonable prices on which to build advance factories, making it easier for industrialists to move in. In the case of Little Island in Cork Harbour tremendous work has been done. There has been criticism of efforts to develop a certain part of the Cork area which had been designated a green area. If industrialists specify certain areas, they will have to be facilitated. It is all very well to say that we must put an industry here or there, but very often the final decision rests with the person who intends to set up the industry. It is very difficult to change his mind and, if we try, it is possible that we could lose industries.
Whatever we do about money, this is one area where we should not cut back. The local authorities have been facilitating industrialists in regard to infrastructures — water, sewerage and so on — but at this stage we could be spending more on promoting new industries. We should be pushing a bit harder to get these factories into production in view of the number of industries running into trouble and that have in fact closed. I am not going to make an issue of this, but I believe more should be done to help industries in trouble at the moment. We are not doing enough in this area. I am afraid that the skills connected with the various carpet and cotton industries, skills that have been developed over many lifetimes, will be lost. Our woollen mills are gone, and with them the related skills. They were lost during this period of recession and the danger is that when things buck up again they will not be around to cash in on the boom times. A bigger effort should be made to protect the skills where there are problems at the moment.
Many of the problems are caused by not buying Irish. It is no use saying anything else. We must introduce some enticement to shopkeepers to sell Irish. The shopkeepers and the bigger supermarkets are very much to blame for this problem because they give pride of place to overseas products. It is terrible to see stuff coming in from Taiwan, Korea and so on. We have no links with those countries. They are not in the Common Market and the only employment they have created here is for somebody with a telex and a secretary and that is about all and their goods find their way into our shops. We should consider giving some grant inducement to shops that are selling Irish to the exclusion of these products where an Irish product is available. It is hard to blame the hard-pressed housewife who will often go for the cheapest item in an effort to balance the budget. It is all very well to preach to her about buying Irish, but if we promoted the selling of Irish goods we would in the long run be doing ourselves a good turn.
In relation to tourism, the Minister gave quite a bit of space to it in his opening remarks. That was only right because it is a very important industry. It has grown from a neglected one to a full industry in its own right. It earns over £500 million and, more important, 99 per cent of it is Irish-owned and controlled, thus contributing in a big way to the economy and playing an important role in our commercial and industrial development. At the moment, unfortunately, this industry is faced with many problems. We have a very high inflation rate. There is trouble in the North. There is very strong overseas competition. There is internal industrial unrest. As yet, we have a pretty undeveloped tourist industry. As the Minister pointed out, tourism is going through some difficult times.
I would be the last person to talk about gloom, but we have some very big problems. There have been a lot of cancellations and a lot of empty hotel rooms in the resort areas. However, I would compliment Bord Fáilte for coming out fighting at this critical time because they have shown professional competence and they fully realise their accountability to the nation. If we realised the magnitude of our problems the battle would be half won. Bishop Lucey once said that most of our tourists were exiles coming back. That was true once, but it is not so true now.
Tourism came our way with comparative ease — Ireland of the welcomes, cheap holidays, friendly people. I hope we are still a friendly people, but our holidays are no longer cheap. At the moment competition for tourists can best be described as savage. Countries hitherto not involved in tourism, such as Yugoslavia, are offering strong competition. The United States are launching a massive campaign. Last year they were offering two or three weeks in Miami for £300, but they forgot to say that one would be scalded to death there.
Financially or physically?
From the sun. Inflation is an important factor. At 20 per cent it has hit us worse than most other countries. The Government's fiscal policies and the budget decisions are calculated to strike a direct blow at our industry. Word has got around about our high prices for petrol, drink and cigarettes.
The cost of transport here is a major factor and it is affecting the industry. One of the biggest impediments to a prosperous industry is the high cost and low quality of transport. However, Bord Fáilte, Aer Lingus, CIE and B&I face a dilemma. Carriers are obliged to pay their way and, as a result, they probably give priority to commercial rather than tourist interests, In times of recession the carriers are inclined to rationalise. Their capacity is tailored to expected demand and decisions reflect commercial priorities. Bord Fáilte's transport objective must be to ensure that there is a well-balanced economic network of services to and within Ireland.
The industry is still reeling from the disastrous effects of last year's postal dispute and petrol shortage. Every effort must be made by all concerned to maintain industrial peace. In difficult times it is reasonable that there should be a closing of ranks among the various interests to ensure maximum benefit to the nation. In this ruthless competition we are not advantageously placed. This is a tiny island off the beaten track. There is a danger of being bypassed and it is easy to understand the reluctance of the various carriers to lose revenue by reducing fares for a specific service. But these carriers must co-operate and risk initiatives that will increase traffic and result in profit rather than loss for all concerned. There is a clear-cut case for the Government to intervene to underwrite the carriers' risk.
Overseas visitors rightly resent the cost of car hire and these firms are at a very serious disadvantage because of the 15 per cent VAT on car hire turnover and the high cost of car insurance. An obvious relief would be the remission of VAT on their turnover.
It is accepted that tourist accommodation must be of the highest quality, well distributed throughout the country to enable visitors to see as much as possible of Ireland in comfortable circumstances. With the success we have experienced over a number of years, Irish hotels, expecially resort hotels, have developed and expanded and in many cases borrowed heavily to do so. Hotels and guesthouses make a significant contribution in their own right to the tourist industry, as well as being part of the tourist and social infrastructure in their own areas, and help to attract tourists to those areas, even though the tourists may not stay in the hotels. In general tourists frequenting hotels and farm guesthouses come from hard currency areas and spend an average of £200 per visit. Hotel and guesthouse accommodation of a very high standard is an essential prerequisite for servicing the requirements of these tourists, many of whom still insist on a mobile-type holiday which enables them to sample a large number of our hotels in one visit. Hence the necessity for uniformly high standards because one weak link spoils the chain.
I will spell out briefly the causes of some of the problems being faced at present. Hotels must pay very high bank interest rates and have difficulty in the repayment of loans. I note that the Minister has taken £700,000 out of the industry because of development problems. There is a case for the Minister to become involved and to cut through a lot of the messing which can go on with local authorities regarding planning permission and so on. Quite a number of hotels are encountering stupid little problems which hold them up. That £700,000 should have been put into the industry in the last year because it is badly needed.
I gather that grants to hotels for improving bedrooms are not available in respect of existing bedrooms but for only new bedrooms.
That is not the case.
I am glad to know that they are available for existing bedrooms.
The Minister should also examine the essential but expensive matter of providing fire escapes in hotels. There should be a 100 per cent grant for this work because so many of our buildings are old. I hope that the £700,000 will be recovered by the industry next year.
The excise duty on drink, cigarettes and petrol adds up to higher charges and more expensive holidays. If the hotel and guesthouse industry is to survive and prosper it must be treated by the Government as an industry, nor merely as a reliable source of revenue. To encourage hoteliers to carry out improvements or in some cases just to stay in business, finance must be made available forthwith from the ICC at the preferential rate of 12 per cent which is given to industry. There should be a top 10 per cent rate of profit tax. VAT should be removed from food consumed——
It might help the House if the Deputy in accordance with normal practice would circulate copies of his volume.
I have only one.
If the Deputy is reading from a booklet he should give his source.
When I have finished I will give my notes to the Minister. They are simply a few notes I strung together because I was told that my time was limited.
The Deputy might recall a row created in the House by Deputy Tully the other evening over people reading speeches.
The source of some of the material might be helpful to the House.
The Deputy is entitled to use notes but the Chair finds it very difficult to decide when notes are simply notes.
Or handouts.
If I had copies I would have no objection to circulating them.
In the likely event of changing trends and the swing away from the mobile tourist because of petrol costs, we must look at amenities attached not necessarily to hotels but to resort areas. I refer to amenities such as tennis courts and swimming pools, pony trekking, boating, fishing, shooting and so on. This will involve local government initiative and participation by central government. Tourist centres must be provided with golf courses and tennis courts and there must be substantial grants for festivals of music and culture. In seaside resorts people with small boats should be encouraged to provide boating facilities and this is an area which should be further developed. Even in areas where such facilities are available, the fact is not generally known. Clean beaches are also very important. Deep sea angling events have proved in the south to be very successful and are a major attraction.
Our road network badly needs improvement. This is not the direct function of this Minister but we must try to improve the appearance of the countryside. Hedge cutting is being neglected and there is widespread dumping of litter. The Minister and his colleagues will need to impose much more severe penalties in this area.
The problem of pollution was mentioned in the NESC report.
That is a matter for another Minister.
It affects tourism. The local authorities are the worst offenders in this respect. One local authority is proposing to dump raw effluent into the most beautiful part of Cork harbour, comparable in beauty to the lakes of Killarney. Some of us went to the trouble of proving that it would be just as cheap to treat it.
Every Irishman who holidays at home is as good as two overseas visitors. By encouraging Irish tourists we could spread the tourist load over the whole season and avoid problems associated with the peak period.
When we consider some of our competitors we find that they give all sorts of concessions. Perhaps they are better off than we are but we must try to copy them. We have much to offer. Visitors from EEC countries are very interested in the new member states. Euro-tourists are coming in large numbers, despite the cost, but they are conscious of value for money. I have spoken to a number of these people and they are satisfied with the hotels, meals and so on. They commend very highly family and farm guesthouses and would like to see more of these guesthouses especially in areas not designated tourist areas in the Bord Fáilte catalogue.
Bord Fáilte have been doing an excellent job promoting certain areas but they are inclined to neglect other areas, such as east Cork, Cobh and so on. I am not being parochial but these areas come to mind. People are inclined to look for things one would least expect. Recently I met some Germans who were most interested in looking at a good Irish farm, village, crops, cattle and so on. Many tourists are interested in this kind of thing. Their interests are diverse and we should cater for them.
I would like the Minister to spend some of the £700,000 by taking VAT off food consumed in hotels — I am not talking about drink — guesthouse operations, hire cars, which at present stands at 15 per cent, and give preferential loans to the people involved in the industry. The wine licence increased to £100. Some of these small guesthouses would hardly make £100 a year profit from their operations. Obviously that was a prohibitive increase.
The tourist industry must be a matter of prime concern for everybody. Every facet of the industry should be involved with the tourist board. Regional tourist boards should be given more teeth and more money and further developed because they are doing a great job, but I am not happy that they are getting their fair share of the cake. For instance, little things happened this year, like closing offices. Maybe we could do without some of them but in areas where we are trying to develop tourism these offices are essential. I was not in favour of those closures.
Regional tourist boards consist of voluntary workers who take pride in what they are doing. They live in tourist areas and seem to have their fingers on the pulse of the problem.
I would like to refer first to something Deputy O'Toole said on the last occasion in regard to Córas Trachtála Teoranta and their apparent lack of services to small firms and their apparent concentration on larger ones. This is a misapprehension, although it is a fairly common one. It probably arises from the fact that larger firms tend to be in evidence at the more visible CTT activities — in group promotions, such as trade missions and trade fairs. These activities are a relatively small part of that organisation's overall budget; they constitute only 16 per cent of expenditure. The bulk of their resources are allocated in a much less visible area — the provision of marketing advice on an individual firm basis. It is this service which is availed of mainly by these small firms.
In a survey carried out by CTT last June it was found that 59 per cent of the firms they were helping had less than 50 employees and in order to cater particularly for the smaller firms, the organisation recently decided to establish a small firm export department to try to encourage new firms of that type who are not exporting into that business and to try to get many of those who were exporting to Britain, for example, to diversify out of it. Already this new section has had meetings with 200 small firms of which they identified 75 as potential new exporters.
The recently established CTT regional offices furnish small firms in the regions with the first point of contact and give them an opportunity they would not have had up to now. A major priority of these regional offices is to conduct a drive to get as many firms as possible in those regions, particularly the smaller ones, involved in exporting. Helping them is of course proportionately much more expensive because a great deal more effort has to be put into doing things for them that would, in the normal course of events, be done by a larger company for itself. In the long term this is worth doing and a very high proportion of their resources and energy are being devoted to these smaller firms.
There was a traditional outlook here that a small firm was set up to satisfy a local need, but increasingly one would like to convince small firms, wherever they are, that looking within the confines of this very small island with its tiny population can be a restrictng attitude and they should look to the European Community with 260 million people and beyond it. The scope for them if they are prepared to broaden their vision in that respect is enormous.
Deputy O'Toole referred at some length to job losses in industry. From everybody's point of view, they are running at an unsatisfactorily high level, particularly after the very substantial net gain in jobs in manufacturing industry in each of the last two years, the biggest gains ever achieved, perhaps in the history of the State. At the moment the indications are that, notwithstanding the enormous job creation this year, there will be no gain in manufacturing employment. Indeed, there may be some marginal loss. We will not know that until January. The fact that I can say in respect of Irish industry in 1980 that it will only have a marginal loss of jobs is a considerable achievement on the part of this country. It is worth recollecting, for example, that less than six years ago the number of people unemployed in the UK was 400,000 and the number of people unemployed there today is 2¼ million. Unless we get carried away by the sight of figures like 114,000 or 115,000 unemployed, which we have not seen since 1976 when we saw a lot of such figures with a smaller population than now——
And a smaller public service at that time.
In case we get carried away with those type of figures, which are repeating now after four years and in a much more severe recession than the one which existed then, it is as well not to look at this part of the country in complete isolation. We should look, for example, towards Northern Ireland. If present trends continue it looks as if the unemployment figure in Northern Ireland will begin to catch up with the figure for the Republic. That is in spite of the fact that our population is substantially more than double the population in Northern Ireland. It is fair to draw the conclusion from that that the real rate of unemployment in Northern Ireland is just about twice what it is here. We are only too tragically aware of the problems that exist in Northern Ireland and the obvious influence they have on that kind of situation, but we should be also equally aware of the enormous rate of subsidy that is pumped into Northern Ireland by the British taxpayers. If notwithstanding that kind of subsidy, which we could never hope or expect to match, the rate of unemployment is still running at a level which is roughly twice ours in real terms, then I do not think we are exactly among the most destitute economies in Europe.
From some of the things Deputies O'Toole and Ryan have said one would think that the Republic of Ireland was some kind of self-contained unit isolated in space not affected in any way by anything that went on in the rest of the world. One would get the impression that everything, good or bad, that might happen here was directly under the control of the Government. The reality of course of the modern world is very different, and those who have had any experience of these matters know that well and have given up making statements that are based on the implication of total isolation. It can be demonstrated, for example, by a reference to our situation in the British market, which is of such paramount importance to us, taking 46 or 47 per cent of our exports. We have currently a tremendous advantage in the British market in currency terms. It is approaching a differential of almost 20 per cent. One would imagine in those circumstances that normal economic laws apply. One could envisage a huge upsurge in our exports to Britain, but that is not happening in spite of the tremendous currency differential. The reason is that, even if we were to offer those goods at half the price again on the British market, we could not sell them because there is no demand in Britain for them.
That type of situation is unfortunate. We have lost the benefit of our currency advantage. There is nothing anybody here can do about that. That is, unhappily for us as well as for the British, the state of the British economy today and that is one of the reasons why for several years at my instigation or encouragement CTT have been seeking to divert firms out of the British market. If more of them had gone out sooner we would be in a somewhat stronger position today. I do not expect our sales to Britain to drop and I look forward to a continuing strong presence in the British market but, at the same time, a declining and, hopefully, quickly declining, percentage of our total exports.
The loss of the differential is not due entirely to a loss of demand in the UK: it is due to a loss of competitiveness at home.
There is an element of that in it also but the differential has been so big in the last couple of months, 20 per cent, that it should, if the British market was normal, have meant a tremendous advantage for us, not just against other exporters to Britain but against domestic producers there. It has failed to do that principally because of an extraordinary basic lack of demand in Britain. It is worth nothing that if we had not the currency differential our present problem in competitiveness vis-à-vis Britain with much lower wage increases would create definite problems for us. It should be borne in mind that to some extent the good fortune of our currency relationship with Britain is only temporarily buying us time in the problems we will have to face up to soon. The fact that they have not happened yet does not mean they are not going to happen. We would be well advised to bear those difficulties in mind now and make up our minds that we are anxious and willing to take the necessary steps to prevent them having a serious effect on our economy.
Notwithstanding the best efforts of the Chair, Deputy Ryan spent a lot of time on the question of my functions in regard to price control. I dealt with that matter some time ago and I did not expect to hear any more about it but it is possible that Deputy Ryan was not here at the time. I involved myself to such an extent in price control that at times the members of the Prices Commission began to resent my interference or interventions in regard to this. They began to feel that they were not being allowed the traditional kind of independence they had enjoyed under my predecessor. I do not know what the current figure is but I am aware that, when it was added up one year ago, I found that on 54 occassions I had intervened to reduce or disallow price rises recommended to me. Obviously, the current figure is a good deal more than 54. I also discovered, having had the records in the Department gone through, that on no occasion in more than four years had my predecessor bothered to intervene in any recommendation. Deputy Ryan's suggestions of my alleged inactivity in this area are not well-founded.
They have not been a success.
Deputy Ryan quoted a whole lot of incorrect figures and he got them all wrong and for the wrong years, but I will not be pursuing that. On the question of buying and selling Irish mentioned by Deputy Ryan, and also by Deputy Hegarty, I would draw the attention of the House to the fact that the chief executive of the Irish Goods Council chaired a meeting on 15 September last between the Irish wholesale and retail food trade which included multiples and multi-nationals. The participants at that meeting agreed for a six-month period from then to (a) initiate no new importation of primary food lines (b) enter into discussions with Irish manufacturers with a view to substitution of lines being imported currently (c) where imported products were sold by an Irish manufacturer to procure those products from that manufacturer rather than through external sources and (d) undertake special steps to ensure that the Irish-made products are highlighted on their shop shelves. The representatives of that meeting of the wholesale and retail food trade also agreed that the Irish Goods Council should monitor progress in these areas.
It was refreshing for me to listen to two Deputies here today speak in support of the Irish Goods Council and of their campaign. My recollection is that since I launched this campaign almost three years ago it is the first time I have had any support from that side of the House in respect of it.
That is not so.
That campaign was disparaged for years by Deputy Kelly in particular when he was dealing with Industry and Commerce matters. It was regarded as a joke, a waste of money and time, something that was just a sort of gimmick that I had dreamed up which was getting worse and worse rather than better. It is noticeable that within the last six months there has been generally—I suppose reflected in what is said here today—a much higher public awareness and acceptance of the necessity for this campaign as well as much more practical support for it. Much of the credit for that probably is due to the present Minister for the Environment, who when he was in my Department devoted a great deal of time and energy to getting that message across. It had to be done painfully and repetitively at times, but it is fair to say that it had really begun to pay off. Because the type of work involved in getting people to sell Irish necessarily must be carried out privately, Deputies and the public at large perhaps would not be aware of what has been done in this respect. The Irish Goods Council over the past year have visited virtually every store in the country of any consequence to encourage the staff in every way open to them to give much greater prominence to Irish goods and to push Irish goods to a much greater extent. From what one can see that certainly is beginning to pay off.
Deputy Ryan spoke at some length about SFADCo and the good work they have done in his constituency in recent years. I was very glad that Deputy Ryan should say that because I recall that here almost three years ago, when I announced that SFADCo would be changing their role fairly dramatically, there was a very great feel of opposition. I recall in particular that one of those who were very vocal in condemning what I was trying to do was Deputy Ryan. At the time he was encouraging SFADCo to resist any change in their activities, something which fortunately they did not do. I am glad that now he rejoices with me in the success of what we set out to do nearly three years ago.
Deputy Hegarty raised the point that I wanted to refer to particularly, and that is the fact that this Supplementary Estimate discloses that Bord Fáilte were unable to spend £700,000 this year on new hotel development or additions to new hotels which had been allocated in the Estimates for 1980. As the Deputy mentioned, one of the principal reasons that they were not able to spend it — not the only reason — was that so many hotels that were thinking of undertaking development or anxious to do it were running into planning permission difficulties. The Deputy suggested that I should involve myself in these matters, but I have found that I have no statutory right to do that. If I as Minister seek to dictate to local authorities about matters such as this, they resent it and resist it. As far as I know, I have no right other than to make normal, ordinary representations to An Bord Pleanála. I will not make any comment about An Bord Pleanála. I will leave it at that. Charity is best expressed there by silence.
He is at it again.
In regard to the difficulties which hotels have run into, one of the big problem areas — not just in relation to hotels but to development generally and I have in mind in particular industrial development — is in a certain large county in the extreme south of this country which shall be nameless. It is pretty devastating that they take up the sort of attitude that they do in regard to certain development, and it is a pity. However, I am glad that the Deputy has drawn attention to this problem where money is going unspent. While this is not the only reason — there are others — this is one of the major reasons why it is going unspent. One would hope that the local authorities and planning authorities generally would take a more positive line or, as the Deputy puts it more directly than I do, cop themselves on in this respect.
Could the Minister give us the benefit of his wisdom on subsidies?
Decision on subsidies is a matter for the Minister for Finance who, I have no doubt, will shortly make his proposals to the Government in this respect. At the meeting certainly I will convey to him Deputy O'Toole's views on subsidies.
And the Minister's own when he was over here.
I have no doubt that Deputy O'Toole's views will be given the weight they deserve.
With all the cynicism the Minister can muster.
Vote put and agreed to.