I move:—
That the Seanad requests the Minister for Industry and Commerce to set up a Departmental Committee to inquire into the high freights charged on live stock and agricultural produce by the railways and shipping companies of the Saorstát.
FREIGHTS ON LIVE STOCK.—MOTION BY SENATOR COUNIHAN.
CATHAOIRLEACH
Is there not already power if these charges are supposed to be too high to have them investigated?
Not with regard to shipping companies. The people engaged in producing and trading in live stock cannot hope to carry on with any measure of success a trade which is so essential to the prosperity of the country except they get some relief from the very exorbitant railway rates, lairage and handling charges, quayside dues and shipping freights. The producer of live stock at the present time is only getting from 15 to 20 per cent. more than pre-war prices, while railway freights are more than 100 per cent., shipping freights 250 per cent., and all other charges from 100 to 150 per cent. higher than pre-war. There are also additional charges which were not then in existence. The English railways were only charging 50 per cent., but they have got permission recently to charge 60 per cent. The Great Northern Railway of Ireland charges 75 per cent., and the Great Southern Railway over 100 per cent. higher freights than pre-war. The railway companies' charges are entirely too high for short journeys and, consequently, all the cattle are walked to the pier or market from within a radius of 20 miles. That is a financial loss to the railways, to the farmers, the traders and the country.
The railway companies may put forward the plea that they have a big permanent way to maintain and that traffic has been reduced. The shipping companies cannot put forward any such plea to justify their charges. The freights at present are out of all proportion to the value of the stock carried. The railway companies may say they have a permanent way which costs a great deal of money to maintain, but the shipping companies have no permanent way to keep up. Still they charge more than the railway companies for the same mileage. A waggon of stock from Buttevant to Cabra costs £6 14s. That is 139 miles, the same distance from Dublin to Birkenhead. For the same number of cattle the shipping company would charge for that journey £8 5s. 0d., a difference of £1 11s. 0d., or over 3/- per head more than the railways. Those in the cattle trade contend that they should have through rates from all important centres in Ireland, to all important markets in England. Birkenhead is one of the most important distributing centres, yet the shipping companies refuse to give through rates to that port.
I will give an instance to show the unreasonableness of the shipping companies' attitude. They were asked to give a through rate from Donabate to Birkenhead. They refused, although they were offered the rate from Balbriggan, which is 10 miles further away, and has a through rate. Where a through rate is in existence the Great Northern Railway were prepared to do anything to facilitate the trade. High freights concern the farmer or producer more than the trader. An English fat stock exporter said to me that, from his point of view, it was a matter of indifference to him whether the freight was 5/- or £5—the farmer would have to pay, as he would buy cattle at a price to meet the charge.
Exporters of live stock are now afraid to complain of the treatment they receive from the shipping companies, for fear of being victimised in the way of being outshipped and inconvenienced in many ways. The majority of the ships trading between Ireland and British ports are now owned by one combine, the Coast Lines, Limited. The Coast Lines, Limited, a shipping combine, has absorbed the following companies which traded between the following Irish and British ports:—The Laird Line (Westport to Glasgow, Ballina to Glasgow, Sligo to Glasgow, Londonderry to Glasgow, Coleraine to Glasgow, Portrush to Glasgow, Londonderry to Heysham); British and Irish Steamship Company (Dublin to London); Ayr Steamship Company (Belfast to Ayr); Burns Line (Londonderry to Glasgow, Belfast to Glasgow, Belfast to Ardrossan); Belfast Steamship Company (Londonderry to Liverpool, Belfast to Liverpool); Dundalk and Newry Steamship Company (Dundalk to Liverpool, Newry to Liverpool, Newry to Glasgow); Dublin and Glasgow Steamship Company (Dublin to Glasgow); City of Dublin Steamship Company (Dublin to Liverpool, Kingstown to Holyhead); Manchester Ship Canal Company (Dublin to Manchester); Tedcastle McCormick Steamship Company (Dublin to Liverpool); City of Cork Steamship Company (Cork to Liverpool); Dublin and Lancashire Shipping Company (Dublin to Preston—the s.s. Brussels). The Coast Lines also absorbed the Langland Line which traded between various British ports. Nine of the twelve were Irish companies, financied by Irish capital and run under Irish control and supervision. They were bought up by the Coast Lines, Limited, about the end of the war, when shipping was at its peak price. The Coast Lines, therefore, paid sums running into many millions for these lines.
The value of shipping has fallen since that time by from 300 to 500 per cent., but the Coast Line is still trying to maintain a dividend on their enormously inflated capital by charging excessive freights, which amount to, in some cases, 250 per cent. over pre-war charges. For instance, the pre-war rate, Dublin to Glasgow, for the largest store cattle was 4/10 per head, whereas it is now 16/6.
The London, Midland and Scottish Railway Company now controls what was formerly the Drogheda S.S. Co., Larne and Stranraer S.S. Co., and Belfast and Fleetwood S.S. Co. Quite recently there has been formed what is called the Irish and English Live Stock Traffic Conference, which includes the following companies:—Coast Lines, Ltd.; London, Midland and Scottish Railway Co.; Sloan Line (Dublin to Isle of Man and Silloth) and Clyde Shipping Co., and all the railway and shipping companies. This conference arranges the freights so that the last vestige of effective competition between the carrying companies has been wiped out, and the whole carrying trade of the country is absolutely in the hands of a monopoly. If the Government does not take some interest in this state of affairs and make some effort for cheaper and faster transit, it is hopeless to expect any improvement. Cheap and speedy transit is absolutely essential to help the business interests of any country.
The Canadian Government has lately succeeded in getting a reduction in charges for transit of cattle from Canadian to British ports of 25 per cent., whereas at the very same time an increase of 10 per cent. on port-to-port charges on Irish cattle has been imposed. The good effects of the money spent and efforts made in Ireland to improve our herds will be entirely counteracted by the excessive charges of the carrying companies.
It will possibly be asked what do I suggest to remedy this grievance. My suggestion is for the Government, the Dublin Commissioners and the Port and Docks Board to combine and erect a municipal lairage convenient to the North Wall where all stock for shipping would have a right to go, and would be fed and looked after under the supervision of the port inspectors. If that were done and there was a right of berthage we could charter ships to take the stock, and in that way competition would help to reduce freights.
The cattle trade about two years ago tried to erect a lairage and started to form a company. A committee was selected, of which I was one. Senator O'Hanlon acted as hon. secretary. I got promises from my friends that they would take shares in that company. Amongst those who promised were members of this House, including yourself, A Chathaoirleigh, Senators Gogarty, Bennett, the Earl of Wicklow and the Earl of Granard. When we went to the Railway Company to look for a site to build the lairage we could not get it, although there were then, and are at present, about 20 acres of vacant land at the North Wall belonging to the G.S. Railways. At first they were satisfied to meet us, but finally they could not give anything suitable. They offered a few acres at one place. We were satisfied to pay the full market value for the land but they would not give any site suitable. That shows how all the carrying companies play into each others hands. The Coast Lines Combine are starving the port of Dublin in giving very little facilities for shipping from that port to Scotland and the North of England. Dublin is the natural route to Scotland and the North of England for all cattle coming from the south and midlands of Ireland. I have seen cattle from Naas and Mullingar sent to Belfast for shipping to Scotland. I have seen as many as three special train loads of stock sent from the Dublin cattle market to Scotland via Belfast. That is a state of affairs that should not be allowed.
In conclusion, I want to say that if the Canadian Government succeeded in compelling the shipping companies to reduce their freights by 25 per cent. from that country our Government are neglecting their duty in allowing these high rates to operate here. Unless something is done to loosen the stranglehold which this octopus has on the Irish live stock trade all the trouble and expense which the Minister for Agriculture has gone to to improve our stock and dairy produce will be nullified owing to these excessive charges.
I desire to support the Senator's motion. The condition of affairs is much worse potentially even than meets the eye. I am glad to see that, according to the Senator, there is a chance of improvement by merely taking a small lairage at the North Wall, but as long as the carrying companies are playing into each other's hands it is impossible to obtain a lairage. The Great Southern Railways Company owns 20 acres of an excellent berthage at the North Wall. It was proposed to place cattle there and to feed them until a ship was chartered. The condition of affairs caused by high rates has its effect 20 miles inland. People walk their cattle further than they should be walked, in order to cut down the expense of sending them on the railway lines. They are confronted with a charge of 16/6 per head for a short journey. In every other part of the world shipping rates are supposed to be cheaper than railway rates. But here you have the Treaty and all its fiscal policy stultified by the English shipping combines. That system is giving trouble all over the world. Probably it caused the war with Germany. I do not propose to remedy this by uniting. I say more power to anyone who can find people who will tolerate such a state of things. It is high time that we took to ourselves a little more power in this matter. The sea covers two-thirds of the world's surface, but its shipping is completely in the hands of England. Again, I say more power to them.
An attempt to answer that in 1919 was to buy a ship called the "Brussels." What happened to it? It was bought for £40,000, and it was sold to the British and Irish Steampacket Company for £70,000. Three of the gentlemen interested are now sleeping directors on the British and Irish line. When people are so supine as that you cannot expect a remedy. If the Free State Government were to do what the American Government has done, to reduce rates inland, and to put a Board something like the Shannon Electricity Board in possession of a couple of cattle-carrying ships, so that even the private interests and politics combined could not change their ownership, there would be a remedy. This is a very important question. When one hears that England is a free trade country, it should be remembered that it is merely because its customs houses are floating. Every British bottom that can carry goods is a custom house to England. It is not a question that we could bring up at the League of Nations. We ought to remedy it here. If we did bring it up before the League of Nations we would find that they are carrying on the same game in Shanghai: blocking the arteries of China, as they are carrying on in the port of Dublin. It might be said that the Chairman of the British and Irish Steampacket Company owns the Port of Dublin. I went down there last night and there was not a single ship to be seen except ships belonging to the British and Irish Steampacket Company. Every Irish ship will be absorbed as long as the price offered is sufficiently high. It is the ordinary pull of economic forces which are just as strong, if not stronger, than national forces.
The remedy I suggest is that a Government control over purchase be instituted. If the Government sees well to put money into the Shannon scheme, that may benefit the country very much internally in the way of developments in agriculture, but it is all stultified by the fact that you cannot even send out your goods free, and that what you bring in can be taxed by freight prices. I am told— I have no authority for the figures except a person who is only a special pleader like myself—that boots are carried into Ireland at £2 per ton, presumably by the British and Irish Company. If you want to bring into Ireland raw hides you pay £8 per ton, although the raw hide is a compact thing and has not to be packed in boxes like boots. That shows that there is a system of adjustment between our fiscal policy and the Custom Houses of England, which, as I said before, are floating. You put a tariff of 15 per cent. on imported boots, but when you attempt manufacturing them at home you are asked to pay £8 per ton by the marine Custom Houses that carry the raw hides to your shores. England is the Shylock of the seas. This has been going on for centuries, and has been the cause of endless disputes. Our Shylocks at present happen to be the directors of the British and Irish Company.
I say this is a matter that should harden the spine of the Irish people against absorption of the shipping Companies by English interests. If the cattle trade is sufficiently influential they should be able to see to it. I do not know what became of the £30,000 which was made as the result of the bringing about of that ring and which ended in becoming a very important jewel in the ring itself. Amongst other factors which smashed the Drogheda Meat Factory was the inability to get ships to cross the Channel between tides. We might get ships something like those which bring over the stallfed beasts from Canada. After ten days' voyage the animals arrive in good condition. We will have to get three or four of these ships placed under the control of a board that is detached and independent in the same way as the Shannon Board. It would be quite easy to adjust internal freights. At present we have plenty of rolling stock. The railway rates are not all the trouble. It is this complete chain of foreign-owned ships that makes profit on cattle so contingent on freights which apparently are arbitrary. To some extent they are not arbitrary. The freights are 400 per cent. higher than pre-war, because the ships that have been gathered into this combine were bought at peak prices, and the company is now struggling to pay off the inflated price paid for these vessels. We are dealing with a condition of things which throws back on the small farmer all the weight and all the failure to get a reasonable price for his cattle. Stock in many parts of the country are being sold at £1 per head less than they were purchased for last year, but if the price were only 5/- per head less it would be bad enough.
There is no guarantee that the freight of the British and Irish Steam Packet Company will remain at 16/6 or that they will not increase it to 21/6. I do not see how the lairage, spoken of by Senator Counihan, would meet the case, because it simply means that the cattle would be in a better condition to be shipped. There would then be a great temptation, seeing that the beasts would be worth more when they reached the other side, to increase the freights to perhaps £1 per head. No one could get a penny in the way of increased profit which this combine would not claim a share of. I say the remedy is to buy two or three ships and to have some Government control, because, after all, there must be some way of preventing these companies being absorbed. It might be possible then to reduce the rates. As I said, this is a question that touches everyone; all the prosperity of this country is involved. It is a question that in a very few years will give rise to serious complications. It is a question that has become an international one, because at present the prosperity of a foreign country really helps the extraordinary development of British shipping. It seriously affects our cattle trade and affects any increase in the consumption of meat abroad, because one might say that the meat cannot reach the mouth on account of the price of the fork.
I wish to be identified with this motion which I strongly support. Senator Counihan has dealt so exhaustively with the manner in which this combine was arrived at that it is unnecessary for me to go into details. I would like, however, to put before the Seanad a few instances to enable it to form an opinion. I will refer to one case regarding the freight on Irish cattle from Dublin to Glasgow.
Previous to the war the charges were 5/-, and the present charges are 16/6. That is over 300 per cent. of an increase. The same thing applies in the case of the charges from Dublin to Liverpool. They used to be six or seven shillings; now they are more than three times the amount. That has been due to the rates and freights being increased during the war and not having been reduced. Railway charges are more or less the same. The rate from Sallins to Dublin pre-war was 14/-, now it is 34/-. There is no possibility of the rates being reduced. When we complained to the railway companies they answered that, owing to the increase in their expenses, they could not meet us. The country all the time is suffering from these high rates and competition is steadily increasing.
The whole world is competing with Ireland in the live stock industry. No later than last week 289,000 carcases of mutton arrived. That is more than 600 times what would be offered at one fair. There were also 40,000 quarters of beef, representing 10,000 live cattle. This competition is on a low rate of charge to the people who sell them. One vessel from South America carried 69,000 sheep carcases at only a fraction per pound freight charges. Our rate going from here to England would be over 30/- a head to Liverpool and over £1 to Glasgow. These charges are the outcome of competition from foreign countries. As Senator Counihan mentioned, the Canadian Government have been using their influence to get cheap rates, and we have to compete with these. There was a tariff between Canada and America up to £5, and the Canadian people used such influence with their Government that they succeeded in getting 25 per cent. of a reduction. The possibility of any improvement taking place in prices is almost hopeless. It will be a certain period of time before we will be able to hold our own. In the cattle trade it is a case of a day older a day worse for a considerable time. I respectfully suggest that we should make some practical effort, and that it is the duty of the Government to appoint what Senator Counihan proposed, a Departmental Committee, to inquire into these things in connection with shipping at the North Wall. It is hopeless to think that an individual can succeed against a combine. There is no question that this combine is in full swing at the Dublin Port, and it is almost driving a good deal of our trade by Belfast. That is doing a great injury to the Port of Dublin, and it is really the duty of the Government to set up an inquiry. We hope that some good will come out of this inquiry. The matter should not be left in an indefinite way to individuals who are smothered by the strength of this combine.
I support the amendment. I do not think it is necessary for me to go into the technical details which have been explained by Senators Counihan, O'Connor and Gogarty, but I reiterate the fact that prices to the farmer have not increased more than from 12 to 15 per cent., whereas the freight charges are three or four hundred per cent. This should not go on. We know that the Government proposes to raise vast sums of money for agricultural credit at 5 per cent. Senator Gogarty suggests that a couple of ships should be got. I cannot see why that should not be done. I am satisfied the Minister is anxious to assist in the matter, and I urge on him that it is desirable that a thorough inquiry should be entered into with a view to combatting what is a monopoly. If you only started two ships they might bring down the prices, and the community as a whole would benefit.
It would be interesting if Senator Counihan told us what the freights were when the "Brussels" was in operation and what the freights are now. I do not think this resolution goes far enough. We have had some previous resolutions from the cattle trade in relation to a paltry sum of money. We heard it stated here at one period that certain people in the cattle trade put £30,000 into their own pockets, and there were very few pockets concerned. A lot of these people became directors and carried on. The cattle trade is a very important industry in this country, and in my opinion it is in bad hands. I do not think the Government would be wise in purchasing ships and handing them over to the authorities while the people were exploited and are exploited to-day. This resolution should call on the Government to go into the proper issue and to see what should be done to assist the development of the cattle trade, and then I would give it all the support I could.
There is one point that must strike anyone, even one ignorant of the cattle trade. We have the most antiquated cattle market in Europe in the city of Dublin. It is placed away from the convenience of railways and shipping companies. The Dublin Corporation has land which is suitable for a cattle market alongside the shipping and railways. No sense or reason as far as I can see exists for having the cattle market where it is on the North Circular Road. If it were removed to what are known as the Sloblands it would be an ideal position in my opinion. And if anything were being done to reorganise and develop the cattle trade this is one of the things that should be considered by a committee such as Senator Counihan has mentioned. I know that a stranglehold by the shipping trade exists. It is also extending to the coal trade. The Government are taking steps to reduce that power to some extent by means of the Shannon scheme. Side by side with that, if we were to reorganise the cattle trade, I believe we would be conferring something on the country that would prove of great value in the future. The cattle trade has to meet great international competition on the British markets.
As Senator Gogarty mentioned, the Canadians are able to send their stock and after ten days they arrive in the English markets in better condition than when they were shipped from Canada or other places. Contrast that with the position in this country where cattle deteriorate to a considerable extent between Dublin and Liverpool, Dublin and Birkenhead, or Dublin and Glasgow. They have lost condition in that eight or nine hours' journey. All that wants looking into. It is not capable of being looked into by Senator Counihan's resolution, and I do not think the resolution goes far enough.
I am sure every member of the House is in sympathy with this resolution. This very important industry of ours has for a long time been struggling with very crushing rates. But I am not sure that Senator Counihan's resolution points out the best remedy. The real problem is the shipping trade of England. So far as the railways are concerned they are within the jurisdiction of a statutory body which has a duty, and to a great extent performs that duty, of controlling those rates. There is no similar control for shipping rates. There is for canal rates but not for shipping rates. And there are very great legal difficulties in getting any tribunal which could, in law, control shipping rates. I am afraid, however, that the mere reference to a departmental committee would not be a successful remedy for the evil. I am afraid the only practical means of bringing about a better state of affairs, so far as the shipping trade is concerned, is by using Government pressure. The Canadian Government has succeeded, I understand, in persuading the carrying companies to reduce their freights——
By 25 per cent.
To such an extent that it pays them to send their cattle across to the English market. If the Canadian Government has been able to do that with those great shipping combines that carry cattle across the Atlantic surely our Government ought, in the case of the monopoly complained of, be able to induce such a lower rate of freights as will enable this great cattle industry to live.
I would be glad if we could have a reply, at his stage, from the Minister in order to see if he accepts the requests made in the resolution.
I agree with what Senator Brown has just said. If one divides the motion into two parts that it would ordinarily fall into, one must set aside the railway freights as a class apart from the shipping rates. The railway rates are controlled by a body before whom the cattle traders have a right to be represented when railway rates are being fixed. There is a second point in which the railway rates come in. Senator Counihan spoke about the through rates question—that is, rates between a town, say, in the interior of Ireland and a town in the interior of England. That rate, of course, depends upon an agreement with the shipping companies carrying cross-Channel traffic and upon agreements with the railway companies on the other side.
The shipping matter is a point by itself. Personally, I think to approach it in the way this motion does would be wrong. The motion suggests that a committee be set up to investigate the matter. Having a committee set up and then approaching the shipping companies will necessarily put them on their defence and get them to take up a more rigid attitude than if approached in another way.
Then again the time that this motion is brought forward must be taken into consideration. I cannot consider the setting up of a departmental committee, at this moment, when another Minister may have to consider what that committee had done. One must remember that an election is coming on. I suggest that, having ventilated the matter, the Senator might leave it to the Minister for Agriculture and myself, if we are in a position to do so after the elections, to approach the shipping companies, in the first instance, and to get their point of view as to charges, and to get their explanation of the different items. Thereafter, if further consultation be necessary it would be for the Railway Tribunal to see what are the relations of the shipping companies and the Railway Tribunal and the result of that. I do not think that a departmental committee is the proper method of dealing with the matter at the moment. As Senator Brown said, the Canadian Government put certain pressure on the shipping companies. I think the big compulsion was a threat of nationalised service of ships. That threat might be used, but might not count for very much. We might even proceed to that point, but I think the matter would have to be investigated further. The two matters raised would require legislation and would require very clear consideration and examination beforehand. I agree with what Senator Gogarty has said, that the mere statement that 98 per cent. of the traffic that goes one way, and 89 per cent. that goes the other, is entirely under the control of people over whom we have no control shows the weak position the country is in. I am glad the Senator referred to the question of tariffs. Any tariff put on can be nullified by the big carrying companies.
The point to our advantage is that there is no monopoly in this instance. There are two sets of shipping lines and there is quite keen competition between them. I would not like to have the matter pushed to the point of insisting that a departmental committee be set up. I would be prepared at a later date to take up with the Minister for Agriculture the whole question, and with him to approach the shipping companies and other important people in the first instance as to a determination of prices charged for freights and to inquire into the reason for these prices and to see if we could not get better accommodation. When one sees the result of all this a motion of this kind might be put down again if people are not satisfied with the results.
Those associated with this resolution appreciate the tenor of the Minister's reply and are very thankful for it. We wanted this as an assurance that the matter would not be allowed to lie as it is. I want to make one comment; it is in respect of some remarks made about the cattle trade. Certain strong remarks were made as to the cattle trade and the way it was carried on, and it was said that the trade was not in fit hands. I would not like these remarks to pass unchallenged. I have been identified, in an honorary capacity, with the cattle traders and I may say I never acted with a more public-spirited body of men. They were always prepared to dig down deep into their pockets to provide capital to forward what was good for the trade and for the country generally. As representing the farmers I say that they owe a deep debt of gratitude to the cattle traders and to the cattle trade which reacts so powerfully upon farming in this country.
In view of what the Minister has said I shall ask leave to withdraw my motion.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.