The words "fishery development" are included in Deputy Garland's amendment and in my amendment I am asking that we insert "fisheries development" before "work".
First, with regard to corporate membership, as indicated earlier in the debate, corporate membership could be of two kinds: that of an angling club and second, that of some other institution that was anxious to make a contribution either to the development of angling in the area, its protection or both.
There is no question of a power bloc and I have so indicated already in the course of this debate. During my discussions with anglers' groups — many of whom had diametrically opposed views with regard to both development and protection — all, in unison, agreed that there are whole areas of the country, of the business community — hotels, guesthouses, public houses — who gain substantially from angling tourism and that they were making no contribution. They appealed to me to include something in the Bill that would enable such people make a contribution if they were willing to do so.
I foresaw the dangers mentioned by some Deputies, that people with fat wallets might be able to buy a whole lot of share certificates, turning all the co-operative societies into monopolies for them and I took steps in the Bill to prevent that happening. If the people who made a big fuss about this read the Bill carefully they would have have seen that no matter how much money that type of corporate member pays, that member will receive just one share certificate. I would be glad if they gave £1,000 willingly for a purpose they themselves claim is a desirable and honourable one. There will be one share certificate available to the ordinary citizen for the price of six packets of cigarettes or seven pints of stout; that is all the voting power or privilege they will enjoy. I am surprised that escaped the notice of many of the people who contributed to this debate.
The second point that surprised me is this: angling clubs have been lauded by Members of this House, both Members who participated in this debate and those who participated in the Second Stage debate, by the members of the clubs themselves, which is not surprising and by various groups representing anglers. One point consistently made to me was that the work they did hitherto did not receive recognition by the State or by anybody else. Knowing what many of them did, I accept that the efforts they put into angling development and protection over the years were not fully appreciated. It was for that reason, at the request of those people right across the board, I inserted the provision in the Bill about angling clubs. This is an important point in view of what Deputy Gilmore raised: they will get membership only with name and address by paying £12 for a share certificate; no more, that is all they will receive. There is no question of getting more membership certificates than actual members. Membership of the co-operative societies is open to all — I want to insist on that. There is no élitism, no exclusivity. Anybody in Ireland — indeed a partitionist objection was made to the word "Ireland" which I rejected — anybody in Ireland is entitled to purchase a share certificate for the price of six packets of cigarettes and become a full member with the same privileges, powers, duties, rights and obligations as somebody from a hotel, company — and I hope there will be lots of them — who will contribute say, £1,000, £2,000 or £3,000 to the development and protection of fisheries in their areas. There is no lack of democracy whatsoever. I reject the suggestion that there is. It will be one person, one vote; no discrimination, no special position for anybody.
I will pardon Deputy Taylor for coming in at the end of the debate and for having such a superficial view of this Bill. When in doubt blame the draftsman is an old ploy in this House I have witnessed on many occasions. Deputy Taylor talked about ploughing in money. I have already indicated to the House that, as far as corporate membership is concerned, in the case of angling clubs, it will be one share certificate for each person nominated from their club provided they purchase a share certificate. For the other membership they will recieve one membership certificate for whatever amount of money they contribute, no matter how large. There is no élitism; it is more than democratic. There are no privileges; there is no regimen of privilege. Deputy Taylor has some effrontery to come in and accuse me or my party of élitism in this regard. There is no regimen of privilege here. There is simply the development of a co-operative society in the various areas to develop a rich, natural resource for our citizens and for tourist anglers who visit the country.
It is easy and emotive to talk about expensive clubs. It is not an expensive clubs to have to pay £1 per month for membership of a co-operative society. Deputy Taylor used emotive words like élitism, privilege, reeks of this and reeks of that. He talked about closed doors; when he had finished speaking it sounded like a cabal. Every speaker is entitled to his imagination but there was no substance in what Deputy Taylor had to say.
Deputy Gay Mitchell introduced something which I found very interesting, particularly knowing that the spokesperson for Fine Gael is a doughty warrior in the field into which he entered. I congratulate him on the principle that fools rush in where angels fear to tread. There is not even a scintilla of suspicion, or a mimesis of a scintilla of a suspicion, that there would be any discrimination against women in co-operative societies. There is no apartheid. The only division is between the angler and his fish and he must lure the fish by bait and so on to him.
