Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 5 Jul 1933

Vol. 16 No. 29

Private Business. - Cement (No. 2) Bill, 1933—Report Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now considered on Report."

I move amendment 1:—

Section 12, sub-section (1). Before paragraph (b) to insert a new paragraph as follows:—

(b) the hours and conditions of labour and the minimum rates of wages at such factory or at any works or operations for the production or preparation of raw materials or articles used for the manufacture of cement at such factory.

As the House is aware I moved an amendment on the Committee Stage asking that powers should be given to the Minister with regard to hours and conditions of employment in the proposed cement factories. After considerable discussion I agreed to withdraw the amendment, on the understanding that the Minister would be prepared to go some distance to meet the object I had in mind. In view of the fact that the Government have put down an amendment to cover the point I ask permission to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

On behalf of Senator Douglas, I move amendment No. 2:—

Section 13. After the word "licence" in line 3 to insert the words "except where such failure is due to circumstances over which he had no control."

I am informed that this amendment is not necessary. I submitted it to the legal advisers of the Department, and they consider that, in all the circumstances, it is not necessary: that the decision is as I stated last week that, in fact, no court will impose a penalty upon the holder of a licence to manufacture cement if the licensee can show the court that the circumstances which gave rise to the alleged breach of conditions were outside his control.

That is satisfactory.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Cathaoirleach

Amendment No. 3 is a Government amendment.

3. New section. Before Section 14 to insert a new section as follows:—

14.—(1) The wages paid by the holder of a cement manufacture licence to persons employed by him for the purposes of the business authorised by such licence shall not be less than would be payable if such business were carried on under a contract between the Minister and such holder containing a fair wage clause similar to that for the time being contained in contracts made by Ministers and Government Departments.

(2) If any person who is the holder of a cement manufacture licence acts in contravention of this section, such person shall be guilty of an offence under this section and shall be liable on summary conviction thereof to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds.

On the Committee Stage I promised the House that I would endeavour to meet the point of view expressed by Senator Farren and his colleagues. I informed the House that I thought we could go so far as to accept the fair wages clause because I find that in the Agricultural Produce (Cereals) Act and in the Beet Subsidy Act there is a similar clause. I have no doubt whatever that in actual fact the trade unions will be adequate to maintain a proper and a reasonable standard of wages in these cement factories, if, and when, they are established. In view of the fact that the principle has, to some extent, been accepted already, and as we are not interfering in any way, but simply giving a kind of general benediction to the fair wages clause, I would ask the House to meet Senator Farren by accepting the amendment.

In my view the value of the amendment is almost wholly in this, that it maintains in such Bills the idea of fixing certain minimum wages and conditions. Having that in view, it is desirable that the House should accept the amendment in this form, which is acceptable to the Minister.

Amendment agreed to.

With reference to the amendment which was passed by the Seanad on the proposition of Senator Douglas and Senator Brown regarding the question of a standard specification for cement manufactured in or imported into the Free State, I would like to make a statement. In the first place, I should say that I thoroughly appreciate the position that has been taken up by the engineering profession, and by Senator Sir John Griffith in particular, that they are very anxious that this question of the specification should be fixed in a satisfactory manner, and that, if at all possible, it should be laid down in the Bill now before the House. Architects, engineers and importers of cement are, of course, most familiar with what is generally known as the British standard specification, and I may therefore say, in order to make it quite clear, that it is the intention to secure that the cement manufactured in the Saorstát shall be of a standard not lower, and if possible, after a full and competent examination, even of a higher standard than the British standard.

The intention is to set up a committee consisting of representatives of the engineering profession and of other persons with a competent technical knowledge to consider the drawing up of a standard specification for the Saorstát. The question will be regarded as one purely for those with the technical qualifications necessary to advise on the question, and the Minister proposes to accept the advice of such a committee. In this way the engineering profession may feel assured that nothing will be left undone to secure a proper specification for the cement to be manufactured in the Saorstát.

Such a committee will require some time for its deliberations, but as at least a year would be required for the erection of the factories, there would be time enough to have a suitable specification drawn up before the factories actually began operations. So far as the issue of cement manufacture licences is concerned, it has already been indicated to such companies as are putting in applications that it will be a condition of the licences that the cement to be manufactured must be of a proper standard and a standard not less than the British standard, which happens to be the one most familiar to engineers and architects. In this way, I think, the situation will be absolutely safeguarded and some assurance felt that cement manufactured in the Saorstát is of a proper specification.

I have reconsidered, in view of the remarks made on the amendment moved by Senator Douglas and Senator Brown, that part of the amendment relating to the fixing of a standard by regulation for cement imported under an import licence, and I am driven to the conclusion that for the short period before the Saorstát factories are operating it would only be an embarrassment to merchants and to the building trades generally if any attempt were made to bring such a provision into effect. It is proposed to issue licences in such a way during the intervening period as will maintain the conditions existing in the cement business during recent years. Nothing but embarrassment would be caused during this comparatively short period by bringing in a new provision which would interfere with the normal course of trade to this extent.

When the new factories are operating it is intended that they will meet the full requirements of the country in ordinary Portland cement. The only cement imported will be various varieties of special types of cements which may not normally be made in the Saorstát. Any attempt to draw up specifications for these various grades of special cements would only cause endless embarrassment to traders and builders without any corresponding advantage. In view of the assurances I have already given in relation to the specification of the cement to be manufactured in the Saorstát, I hope I shall not be pressed in relation to fixing a standard specification for imported cement.

The position, as the amendment stands, is that the Department of Industry and Commerce will be bound to make an order prescribing the standard specification, covering not alone the manufacture but also the importation of cement during the intervening period, between the passage of the Bill into law and the setting up of the factories. I would be prepared to accept the amendment if the House could see its way to delete all the references to import licences and to the importation of cement. I cannot see that it is really essential that the Seanad should press this matter of insisting on a standard specification for imported cement during the intervening period. As I explained, I think the position is fully met by the fact that the Minister will lay down conditions in the import licence. As regards the manufacture of cement, I stated that, in fact, we have powers to see that the specification is maintained, and in view of the insistence of the Seanad, I would be prepared to ask the Dáil to accept an amendment, if the Seanad could see its way to meet me by deleting the portion referring to the import of cement.

Cathaoirleach

I think it is my duty to point out to the Seanad that no intimation of the line of action that has been taken was made to me. Had it been intimated to me I would have pointed out to the Minister that his course of action is quite impossible. We passed an amendment and it is for the Dáil to deal with it. The only other course open to us was to have an amendment brought forward on the Report Stage to get the other amendment deleted. The Minister did nothing of the sort. He springs on the House a long litany of the grievances of importers, which he had already, I think, inflicted upon us sufficiently on the Committee Stage. To my mind another long litany of the dangers to importers could not be allowed. The Minister now desires to ask the House to undo, without any notice, what it did on the last day. It imposed upon importers the necessity of bringing in a standard grade of cement. I wish to point out that we have no power to do any such thing. May I also point out to the Minister that if he desires such a thing, if he had consulted me, I would have recommended a course to be adopted in order to secure what he requires. Nothing can be done in the matter now, except to adjourn the Report Stage and bring in another amendment.

If necessary I will be prepared, in view of the Minister's remark, to move that the Report Stage be adjourned. I do not think the House wishes to take any advantage of any misunderstanding. As one whose name was connected with the amendment we had on the Committee Stage, which I prefer, I have to admit that during the week I had further inquiries made. I asked certain persons if they could give any evidence that there was any quantity of bad cement being brought in. I have not got that evidence. I am also pretty well satisfied that there are very genuine difficulties which will have to be got over if imported cement is going to be kept to a standard. If we were going to have cement imported for ten years these difficulties would be worth the trouble, but if you are only going to have Portland cement imported for the next year or for a less period, until the factory is started here, when no more Portland cement will be imported, I am inclined to say that the Government should hesitate about going to the expense of making provision for testing by the Customs authorities during that period. While I would prefer the amendment we had on the Committee Stage, I would be prepared to agree to the deletion of that portion of it dealing with imported cement, after the further knowledge I have, and on being satisfied that the Government would agree to the other portion. It means that there will be consultation and that bona fide Irish standard of Portland cement will apply to the cement manufactured here and to what is imported. I am prepared to move that the Report Stage be adjourned until next week, in order to enable the Minister to put down the requisite amendment. I expected there would be an amendment here to-day.

Cathaoirleach

Is that motion seconded?

I second it.

I should like to say that I took some interest in this particular matter and I fought very hard all along the line to get the amendment which appeared in Senator Douglas's name inserted in the Bill, but in view of the statement made by the Minister and of all the circumstances, I think that the Minister has gone a good part of the road to meet us. The Minister has agreed to put into the Bill a provision to the effect that the standard specification shall not be lower in the case of cement to be manufactured in the proposed factories than what is known as the British standard. In the meantime, with regard to imported cement, efforts will be made to meet that particular point when licences are being issued. I think the Minister has gone a good part of the road to meet us, and under these circumstances I think we should endeavour to facilitate the Minister as much as we can in the matter. Personally I do not think that there is any necessity for postponing the Report Stage of this measure for another week.

Cathaoirleach

That is for me to decide.

With all respect, suppose any member of the House moves that the Report Stage of the Bill be adjourned until next Friday would that be in order?

Cathaoirleach

Quite.

If that is in order, I move that the further consideration of the Report Stage of the Bill be postponed until Friday next.

That will not give sufficient time to have in the amendment.

I want to avoid postponing the Report Stage for another week, if possible, because there will be a big accumulation of business by that time. It appears to me that this matter will only take a few minutes consideration on Friday.

Cathaoirleach

Might I point out that if we are to consider it on Friday, we have only 28 minutes to prepare the amendment as notification must be given before four o'clock this afternoon if the Report Stage is to be taken on Friday?

I believe that when necessity arises we should hustle a bit. I do not believe there would be any difficulty in moving an amendment to delete these lines in the previous amendment within 20 minutes.

Senators Johnson and Wilson rose.

Cathaoirleach

Do you rise to support the amendment? It has been proposed to adjourn the Report Stage until next Wednesday and Senator Farren proposed as an amendment that the Report Stage be adjourned until Friday.

I do not rise to second that.

Cathaoirleach

Then the Senator must sit down.

I second the amendment and in doing so, I want to point out that the Bill, when an Act, will contain a section making it incumbent on the Minister to set up a standard for cement that is manufactured in the country, but there will be no such incumbency upon him in respect to imported cement at any time. I think there would be a danger in that and inferences might be drawn that would not be justified. There will be power given to the Minister to attach conditions regarding imports and so on, but inasmuch as we are making a specific enactment that a standard specification in respect to manufactured cement will be set up, I submit there should be a similar requirement in regard to imported cement, whatever be the date of the beginning of the condition.

Cathaoirleach

We shall argue that on the amendment on Report.

It will be too late then to amend it.

Cathaoirleach

The question before the House is the adjournment of the Report Stage to next Friday. Is the Senator against the section?

I want to point out that if we delete the section——

Cathaoirleach

You cannot do that.

On the Report Stage, yes.

Cathaoirleach

When the Report Stage comes on.

We are on the Report Stage now.

Cathaoirleach

The Senator cannot do that without giving notice to that effect.

Can we not vote against the section?

Cathaoirleach

The Senator cannot vote against the section on the Report Stage.

Has the Minister his draft amendment ready? If he has, I would withdraw my motion in favour of that of Senator Farren.

I should explain that I regret more than I can say that notice was not given to the Cathaoirleach that this matter was being raised and that it was not raised in a more formal manner. The position was that following a discussion last week representatives of the Department of Industry and Commerce discussed the matter with Senators who were interested and I think that these Senators—Senator Griffith did, at any rate—expressed the view that it might be possible to meet our position by deleting the words referring to import licences. I was under the impression when I came here to-day that I might be able to get the House to agree to that amendment. However, if the Cathaoirleach wishes, he can postpone it to a later stage. The amendment itself would be quite simple. It would be simply to delete the words in the new section "or any import licence under Part V thereof" and the words "or imported into." If the Cathaoirleach were willing, I think we could deal with the matter now if the House were agreeable. On the other hand, I have no objection to postponing the matter. I was under the impression that we could get agreement on it and that we could settle it. here and now.

I am very astonished at this. I cannot see for the life of me why we should allow bad cement to be imported for the next year, because that is what it means. Unless the Minister makes some arrangements the cement imported will be of inferior quality, because there are as yet no cement factories in the country. We do not want to have indifferent cement brought into the country. If some unfortunate person down the country builds a house with bad cement, which is brought in within the next year, it will give him something to think about afterwards. I really cannot see for the life of me what is the object in not doing now what we admittedly are going to do a year hence.

Cathaoirleach

The real question before us is whether the Report Stage will be adjourned until Friday or to Wednesday next. We might take this particular statement of the Government as being the amendment so to speak and we can have it handed in before four o'clock. I simply want to see that the rules of the House are observed.

The amendment can be circulated to-night.

Ordered: That the Report Stage of the Cement (No. 2) Bill, 1933, be adjourned until Friday, 7th July, 1933.
Top
Share