I am disappointed at the way in which the budget debate has gone in the last few days. It is not relevant to point to the shortcomings in some decisions made by a prior Government because it does not relate to to-day's position. When Deputy Briscoe speaks about dishonesty in the Opposition I am amazed and I am also amazed at his comments in relation to the media. I will not make an issue of that but his contribution indicates quite clearly that there has been a critical reception of this budget. I have contributed to almost every budget debate since I came to this House and I have never before seen more despondency or more criticism of a budget. Deputy Briscoe was not speaking the truth when he talked about the warm reception the people had for the budget. He should not say the Opposition are dishonest in criticising it. The fact that the Deputy was so concerned and narked about the criticisms means that he knows well that it was a bad budget that will have serious repercussions for the economy and for the people.
In case people might get the impression that there is nothing good in the budget I honestly welcome the increases given to old age pensioners, to social welfare recipients and to the disabled in this International Year of the Disabled. It is at least a recognition of the plight of these people. During the debate both Deputy Briscoe and the Minister for the Environment glowed about the contributions made to those people. However, since this Government took office we have had a budget a week. The cost of living is constantly rising. This should be taken into account when talking about concessions to the aged and social welfare recipients. The increases given to them do not offset the increase in the cost of living since the budget last year when they had their last increase. Every other day the cost of the necessities of life rises. The price of coal—something which is an essential, especially for old people—is prohibitive and I understand that the ESB are seeking to apply a further increase because of the cost of oil. Looking at the performance of the present Minister for Industry and Commerce the new price will be granted and there will be no problem.
I will deal with some Departments and the amount of money provided to run them for the year. I will make a few general comments on the budget and I have some criticism of the performance of the Ministers in this Government.
The Minister for the Environment spoke here yesterday evening and I have a few things to say about his contribution. The Minister of State in the House at the moment is much more conversant with the problems of local authorities and the problems of the Department than the Minister who is actually in charge of the Department, Deputy R. Burke, to judge from his contribution yesterday evening. I do not know if the Minister was ever a member of a local authority or of Dublin Corporation but he almost travelled every boreen in the country when he spoke here from a script read out at a very fast pace. If one has a script one must have put some thought into it. I do not want to follow the Minister up every boreen. I want to quote one statement he made. He said:
The Opposition are bereft of any ideas when they say that the allocation to local authorities is inadequate.
I have never seen such gross exaggeration in any speech or such blatant untruth as I heard from the Minister for the Environment last night.
The Minister mentioned roads, bridges, ring roads and by-passes, which I want to deal with. I take it that it is the allocation of money to local authorities he was referring to. The local authorities cannot exist with the contributions which they are receiving from the Department of the Environment. One of the reasons there was a change of Government in 1977 and Fianna Fáil got in with such a majority was because they said they would take away road tax and rates. When they did that the money which local authorities depended on to carry out the day-to-day work of their councils was taken away from them.
I am a member of the biggest local authority in the country. Would the Minister please check his files and find out the number of times Cork County Council appealed to him and his predecessor for extra funds and appealed to both of them to receive deputations to point out the seriousness of the situation? Cork County Council are coming to a halt. When the Minister says the funds are not inadequate and that the money available to local authorities is not inadequate is he aware that in 1978 Cork County Council took a decision, which was supported by the Minister's party in the council, as a result of the advice given by the county engineer, the county manager and senior officials in the county that we would drop any road improvements until we got a further allocation and that the resources available to the council would be applied to road maintenance only?
This was a rather serious decision to take and it was not taken without contact with the Department, appeals for extra funds and appeals to the then Minister to receive a deputation. Then we have the Minister for the Environment coming in here and in a prepared speech accusing the Opposition of dishonesty by saying that the allocation to local authorities is inadequate when he knows that what the Opposition say is the truth. We took the same decision in 1979. We are doing a very poor job in maintenance because of the amount of money available to us.
I heard Deputy Tully and others talking about pot holes. I am sure the Minister of State must be aware of the condition of our roads. In 1978, 1979 and 1980 Cork County Council adopted a policy, as I stated, which was supported by all the Fianna Fáil members on that council. Now we have the Minister coming into the House and saying that the funds were adequate. He is accusing the Opposition of being dishonest. He does not know what is going on in local authorities when he makes that statement. When we have a crisis situation it is accepted by those in power, by members of the Government.
Would somebody call the Minister for the Environment aside and tell him what the position is because apparently he has not read his files or does not know what the position is in Cork County Council. I do not know what the position is in Offaly County Council or in any other local authority. I was perturbed at a Minister with a prepared script making that statement in the House. There is an old saying that you can fool some people all the time, all the people some of the time but you will not fool all the people all the time. The Minister for the Environment will not fool all the people all the time when he is talking about the amount of money coming to local authorities from his Department. I accept that every local authority worthy of their name will look for more money from the Department of the Environment than they will get. Every local authority will demand more money than it is possible to give them. It is important, however, that the Minister realises the seriousness of the situation.
The Minister said that he was having such matters as ring roads, the erection of bridges and by-passes examined. That looks like an election gimmick. A former Member of this House, who has gone to his reward, used to say, when people spoke about money for bridges, that there was another election in that. I believe the Minister is adopting the same policy. We will be talking about those things, as we have been talking about the Mallow road, for almost 20 years. That type of thing infuriates local authority officials and the general public. There are Ministers who should be aware of the true position but are not.
I am not in a position to contradict the statement the Minister made about the number of houses built over the past year. He said it was a record. One would get the impression that the housing problem was almost near a solution. I do not believe it will ever be solved. We will always have a housing problem. Any person who should be so conversant with the housing problem in this city and still makes that statement does not know what he is talking about. There are hundreds of families squatting in this city. Surely the Minister must be aware that the housing problem is not near a solution. I am not talking about outside the city. It is almost as serious in other areas.
I want to reply to some of the cases the Minister made. He spoke about private housing and the incentives given to people who want to build their own houses. In Cork County Council there is a slowing down in relation to SDA loans. I can give the Minister the names of people who wanted to buy houses in September and October in Cork city. Some of them are entitled to be housed by the local authority under the Housing Acts. They cannot get approval for their loans because the money is not available and, therefore, they lose their prospect of purchasing a house. It is a very serious situation when two people are contemplating building a house and they are told they cannot get a loan because the money is not available. Then the Minister comes in here and boasts about the housing record.
The Minister mentioned water and sewerage schemes. His speech was more like an Estimate speech than a budget speech. He said he was delighted with the progress being made in relation to sewerage schemes and group water schemes. The cost of group water schemes has increased rapidly. Contributions are made initially by the group and then they find that the work is not being carried out and that costs are going up. Most of the schemes I am aware of have fallen through because of increased costs.
I am quoting Cork County Council because I am a member of it and I know what happens. There are three committees of that council. Last year we had an application from the manager, to which we agreed, to increase the water charge from £8 to £16. At the estimates meeting this year we had an application for an increase from £16 to £24 and a sizeable increase in the meter charges. This would bring in £270,000 this year. This is a secret-way of collecting money which the Minister should be providing to the local authorities. He took away their only source of revenue by the removal of rates and car tax. The Minister's party refused the manager's request at the estimates meeting to bring in this extra £270,000. That type of secret collection of taxation is creeping into the local authorities. Officials were informed in a circular from the Department that they should examine ways and means of collecting revenue. I take it this is a response to that circular.
Another form of secret collection of taxation is the development charges imposed on people who are looking for planning permission, or for connection to a water supply scheme or a sewerage system. This taxation is replacing the revenue accruing to the local authorities prior to 1977. In Cork County Council the Minister's party have become aware of this and they will not have it.
The Minister spoke about the building industry and its wonderful contribution to job creation. In normal circumstances that would be quite true. The Minister should be aware that there are many redundancies in the building industry at present. I was glad to hear that the Minister is determined to tackle the problem of pollution. It is about time that this serious problem was tackled. In Cork county there is indiscriminate dumping of toxic waste and it is about time the Minister got to work on this very serious matter.
As I said at the outset, I welcome the concessions given in the budget to the poorer sections of the community, even though they do not compensate them for the increase in the cost of living. Before the budget provisions were announced last Wednesday, we were talking about deficits to the tune of about £250 million carried forward into this year's budget. I believe — and I am sure the Minister is convinced of this — that revenue collection under the budget will fall very far short of the target set by the Minister for Finance. Any Deputy who talks to his constituents will be aware that the point of diminishing returns has been reached in the price of drink. People will not consume the same amount of drink as they were consuming prior to the increase in price. Because of the increased price some people will not drink at all, or will drink very little.
I have no objection to social drinking. I heard the Minister for Health talking about excessive drinking. He almost gave that as a reason for the increase in price. An increase in the price of drink will not inhibit an excessive drinker, but it will cause more suffering and agony to his dependants. The point I want to make is that the target set by the Minister for Finance for revenue collection from the increase in the price of drink will not be reached.
The Minister increased the price of a gallon of petrol by 15p. Since the 1977 election we have been saying that our present difficulties can be traced back to the 1977 election manifesto. Expectations were raised to unlimited heights. The Government insisted that the causes of our difficulties were the world recession, the price of energy, the increase in the price of oil. It was suggested that the Arabs were almost entirely responsible. If we accept the Fianna Fáil argument that these are the major factors in our serious recession, there must be some Arabs in the Government because last year they increased the price of petrol by 20p and this year they increased it by 15p plus VAT, making 35p a gallon in two budgets, almost in one year. The increase in the price of oil and petrol will have very serious repercussions.
Before this debate is concluded I would ask the Minister to examine the possibility of giving a generous concession to workers who have to use their cars to travel to and from work. I am sure the Minister for Finance appreciates the point I am making. Before the constituencies were changed he was in the constituency which I represent. The Minister for Finance has only one voice in the Government and very often the Dublin based members if the Government dominate the Government.
I am sure the Minister is aware that regularly people have to drive 20 or 25 miles to and from work five days or perhaps six days of the week. The Minister knows well the people I am referring to. For them a car is not a luxury but a necessity. If some kind of tax concession, such as that allowed to farmers and business people, was given to people on the unemployment register who sought work 20 miles away from their home it would be an incentive to them to do so. In my constituency jobs are not available in the villages and towns and people must travel.
The Government and various agencies discriminate against rural Ireland. I say that from my experience in public life. In the Cork harbour area the IDA have 1,200 acres of land for industrial development. Recently there was an application by the IDA to contravene the county development plan so that they could buy land in an area which was not zoned for industrial development. As a result of a vote of the council and after many meetings the IDA were granted that permission. At the meeting of the council the IDA made the argument that the land was in the north city. They already had land in the south city but they said there were 5,000 people unemployed in the north city and it would be very difficult for them to travel to Little Island or the lower harbour area, which is five or six miles away. However, it is not difficult for people in Rockchapel and in rural parts of the county to travel to the lower harbour area for work. I appeal to the Government and the IDA to attract small industry to the villages and towns of rural Ireland rather than to create an immense social problem by attracting young people away from rural villages into cities.
The Minister for the Environment spoke yesterday about ring roads and traffic problems. We are adding to those problems by concentrating all the development in cities. There are many rural villages and towns with a good work force and with good resources. Extra concessions should be granted to small industries to keep a community together in a village or town. I know the Government are doing something about decentralisation but they are dragging their feet. Why should the headquarters of Bord na Móna, the ACC and so on be located in Dublin? Why should people who have got their leaving certificate in Belmullet or elsewhere have to travel to Dublin to join the Civil Service? There should be a more vigorous drive towards decentralisation.
The Government saw fit to impose further constraints on people by increasing the price of petrol. A car is necessary for people living in rural areas who have to travel many miles to work. In cities there is a reasonable public transport system but in rural Ireland there is a totally unreliable system. People must use their car or give up their job and add to the numbers on the unemployment register. This is a matter that should be examined. People would use public transport if it were efficient. Some members of my family have to go to Cork to work but they cannot depend on public transport. Conditions have militated against rural Ireland and we should now, because of the additional constraints imposed on workers by the increased price of petrol, examine the possibility of bringing jobs nearer to the people.
The position of agriculture is very serious and one cannot divorce the state of the industry from the unemployment problem. The budget did nothing for the unemployed nor did it do anything to create extra jobs. If we want to tackle the problem of job creation the most economic way to do so, and the surest way, is through agriculture. Derating agricultural land was a concession. Deputy Briscoe spoke about the generous concessions given to farmers and said they did not appreciate what was done for them. I do not expect him to be aware of farmers' problems. Is he aware that since 1978 farmers incomes have fallen by almost 50 per cent? What was given to farmers was very meagre and will not restore confidence in the industry which is so necessary. I am not concerned with the farmer who bought land at £3,000 an acre or the big farmer who bought extra machinery. I am concerned with the average family farmer who, as a result of advice, expanded his enterprise over the last two years. Money was handed out by the banks and the ACC as if it were going out of fashion. We encouraged such farmers to expand and the country owes them a debt. We owe nothing to the rancher who sits on a valuable resource. We should grant every form of assistance to the farmers whom we encouraged to borrow money and expand their enterprise. Now that person finds himself with his back to the wall. The inputs into this enterprise increased astronomically but the output only increased marginally.
If one looks at the auctioneering columns in the daily papers one will see that there are many farms for sale. They are not put up for sale by people retiring or the representative of so-and-so but by those who are in difficulty and are forced by financial institutions in many cases to sell what is a valuable asset to the State in job creation. We should ensure that the family farm is a progressive unit as it can make a vital contribution to the economy.
The policy introduced by Fine Gael was a first step towards recognising this problem. One of the weaknesses of this Government is that a tax is introduced today and it is gone tomorrow. Farmers do not know what is on and what is off. The resource tax is abolished for the time being but it is not abolished for good. The resource tax of last year must be paid even though some people who will be paying it are in serious financial difficulties. Then there has been the repeal of the bovine disease levy which should never have been imposed, the abolition of rates on agricultural land which has been partly implemented. There was also the introduction of a capital allowance against income tax liability in respect of breeding stock. That is a very important concession because unfortunately we are selling or eating our seed potatoes, as somebody described it. We are selling our basic stock.
The Taoiseach spoke about our balance of payments and maintained that the position was improving immensely. The only reason it is improving is that we are selling off our cattle, they are leaving the country daily by the boatload and jobs are being lost as a result. Neither are we importing agricultural machinery which would be bought by our farmers had they the money, thus creating a general spin-off and more jobs. The prime industry in our economy is agriculture. If we are to make any progress we must restore confidence in that industry which can be done only by allowing some margin of profit. This must be tackled, first of all, by the Government and the Minister acknowledging that a problem exists and discussing it with the appropriate people. I know the Taoiseach has had discussions with the farmers, but from the Minister's public statements one would think that no such problem obtained.
There is also an interest subsidy for certain farmers and the reduction of stamp duty on the transfer of agricultural property to young farmers. This concession is aimed directly at the type of farmer about whom I am speaking, who has a family farm, who is encouraged to expand and who has responded to the advice and guidance of the Department and of the county committees of agriculture. It is this category of farmer who is in serious trouble. The fact that tractor sale are down almost 60 per cent serves only to highlight this problem. Farm machinery sales are down 50 per cent, farm building materials down 60 per cent, compound feedstuffs are down 15 per cent cattle feeds down 22 per cent and fertiliser sales down 12 per cent as at July 1980, with little improvement being shown since then. That is a clear indication of what I am talking about, of the spin-off on our economy to other sections of the community which would benefit if proper attention was given to our main industry and its contribution to the economy as a whole.
I want to mention briefly the Government's policy in regard to the "Buy Irish" Campaign. Here patriots are needed today because we have the goods to offer but, unfortunately, this campaign has not been successful. The Government, semi-State bodies and local authorities should give the lead because it is leadership that is necessary particularly as it applies in this respect. We boast that we have advantages in agriculture by way of climatic conditions and so on within the EEC. Yet one can find Northern Ireland eggs and Dutch chickens being delivered daily to our hospitals and institutions. We have not tackled the problem of ensuring that our farmers are in a competitive position. Of course here inflation is the major problem rendering our farmers less competitive. I know that our poultry association and others have made representations to the appropriate Ministers but that little progress has been made. Indeed not sufficient attention is given to these matters.
There is then the road tax on cars. Certainly this was one of the promises in the Fianna Fáil manifesto that attracted most of our young voters at the last general election. There is here a sort of double-think — the first year the tax was £5, the second year £10 and of course it is then the easiest thing in the world to double that and bring in the revenue. The increase in road tax announced in this budget could be described as fraudulent, being imposed under another name, that of a "registration fee". This is wrong of a Government who gave a commitment that, under no circumstances, would this car tax be re-introduced. We know perfectly well that the budget provisions this year will not yield the amount demanded, Indeed we may very well, in a supplementary budget later in the year, have another hike-up in this area because it constitutes an easy way of collecting revenue.
The Minister mentioned in his budget speech the additional £35 million to be reaped from our telecommunications system. The details have not yet been spelled out. I hope the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs is serious in his drive to improve our telecommunications system. I know he will be spending a lot of money but I sincerely hope such expenditure will bring about a vast improvement in our telecommunications system. Our telephone system is very bad and certainly in rural areas has militated against industrial development and the attraction of new industry. That is one aspect I should like to see being tackled. It appears we shall have a very expensive telephone system. The Minister talks about collecting £35 million from telephones.
Finally I should like to deal with the Department in respect of which I am spokesman, that of Defence. I am sorry to say that the Estimate for that Department in the Public Capital Programme, when account is taken of inflation and increased wages, shows a net decrease of £4,928,000 this year. When appropriations in aid, which have been increased by £2,348,000, are taken into account one is talking about a decrease of almost £6 million. I understand that the appropriations in aid will be met by rents on housing which the Defence people are obliged to pay. This is something about which I have been speaking to a number of people in the Defence Forces. I visited a number of barracks around the country. I should like to acknowledge publicly here my appreciation of the courtesy shown me by the Minister, and his predecessor, in allowing me to visit these places, and almost giving me a free hand in examining and seeing for myself what are the problems involved. I have advocated the setting up of a commission of inquiry to examine working conditions, pay and accommodation of our Army, Navy and Air Corps. I know the Minister will not agree to such a proposal. There was a similar commission of inquiry, the Conroy Commission, which examined Garda pay and conditions as a result of which concessions were awarded. I believe the only other force in this State comparable with the Army and Defence Forces is the Garda Síochána. I am not maintaining for a moment that the Garda are not entitled to the concessions they have been given but I am very concerned that the demands being made by our Army and Defence Forces appear to be falling on deaf ears.
I want to deal briefly with the question of Defence Forces accommodation. I know I cannot go into detail. Here one is talking about houses, married quarters in particular. I do not want to mention any area in particular. One important consideration here is the age of the housing. I might compare the situation of the Defence Forces with that of the Garda Síochána in this respect. Sixty-nine per cent of Army housing was built prior to 1920, housing inherited from an alien power. Garda housing pre-1920 amounts to 10 per cent. In the period 1920 to 1960 the percentage of Army houses built was 13 per cent while for the Garda Síochána the corresponding percentage was 29 per cent. Between 1960 and 1980 the percentage of Army houses built was 18 per cent while that for the Garda Síochána represented 61 per cent.
I believe the Army are showing their resentment by the fact that, since 1977, 8,000 people who joined have left for one reason or another. I know there are recruits being taken on but ultimately this means that we shall be left with more inexperienced Defence Forces. Like many people I have to ask myself is it because the Defence Forces have not got a representative body and are not unionised. Is that the reason the Government have turned a deaf ear to them? The pay and conditions do not compare favourably with those of the Garda Síochána or even messenger boys in different areas or civilian jobs which are similar. This is a very serious matter. On 17 December 1980, I asked the Minister of State at the Department of Defence, Deputy Moore, a question in relation to accommodation, pay and conditions and he replied, and I quote from the Official Report, column 1507, volume 325, No. 8:
The pay and conditions of service of all Defence Forces personnel are kept under constant review by my Department and I am satisfied that, within the resources available, the present situation in this regard is generally satisfactory.
The accommodation provided for members of the Permanent Defence Force is generally of a satisfactory standard.
I understand that there are 223 people awaiting Army accommodation. At all times we have a very dedicated and very reliable Defence Force here. That is something which the Government and the Minister and the general public should be fully aware of. The Defence Forces deserve a better deal than they are getting. In recent times they cleaned our streets when they were dirty during the corporation strike; they drove us to work during the bus strike and filled our car with petrol when the tanker drivers were on strike. They even died for this country to uphold the name of the Irish nation. I would ask the Minister to set up a commission of inquiry to make sure they get a fair deal. People from the Defence Forces contact me and ring me up or write anonymous letters because they cannot give their names for obvious reasons. They spell out what I have been saying here.
I know Ministers have visited the different installations and military barracks throughout the country and they must be aware of the accommodation problems and the difficulties involved. One can argue that it is being kept under review and that some amount of work is being carried out and some improvements are being made. But it is going on too slowly. When a Minister comes in here and answers a question by saying that everything is satisfactory then he is not facing up to the facts and he is not facing the seriousness of the situation which is highlighted beyond any shadow of doubt by the number of people who leave the Army each year through dissatisfaction. They do not engage in any form of protest but they protest by leaving the Army. One only has to look at the number of people in the Defence Forces who under an Act of Parliament buy themselves out because they are not satisfied with conditions; and this is happening at a time when there is rampant unemployment here, when according to the Minister 122,220 people are unemployed. Of course it is far in excess of that because every time one reads the paper one reads of factories closing, of threatened redundancies, of people on short time and so on. We are only about 57 per cent of our establishment strength.
In the programme which the Minister introduced there is a reduction of £4,414,000 for the repair of vessels. Is that an honest presentation at a time when the Government have underpaid by 2 per cent, when the national pay agreement is 15 per cent. The two vessels to be built in Verolme dockyard are to cost £15 million and they are already six months late. Is the Minister serious in saying that this work will be carried out when there has been a reduction of almost £4.5 million in the amount of money being made available.
That leads me to the point on which I opened. This budget will not realise its target. I do not know what is cooking. Is it that the Government intend to go as far as they can, keep their heads down, dissolve the Dáil and declare an election before the necessity for a supplementary budget arises? That is what they appear to be doing because they have not provided the amount necessary to run the Departments of this State.
I know the Minister for Education is here and he will talk about his own portfolio. But we have not provided for school transport.