Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 23 Jan 1935

Vol. 19 No. 13

Reclamation of Land—Motion.

Mr. Counihan

I move:—

That the Seanad requests the Executive Council to cause an examination to be made of the tidal inlets in County Dublin with a view to ascertaining—

(a) the acreage of land capable of reclamation in such inlets or any of them;

(b) the cost of such reclamation;

(c) the proportion of such cost that would be expended in labour and the relief of unemployment afforded thereby; and

(d) the value of the reclaimed land for agricultural or forestry purposes.

I have been told, a Chathaoirligh, that this motion would be more suitable for discussion before the Dublin County Council and that, if I intended to have it discussed in this House, I should have included the coastline of the whole country. That, possibly, is correct in other circumstances, but my reason for definitely naming the coastline of County Dublin is that the Board of Works issued an invitation for suggestions as to relief schemes in any particular place. That was my reason for the motion and, furthermore, that as this coastal reclamation, as far as the Government is concerned at all events, must be only an experiment, I believed that the County Dublin would be the best place to try out that experiment. I have been told also that my resolution is too vague and that I should have put down more definite requests to the Government to start work on this scheme immediately. I do not think, however, that the putting of the resolution in that form would have any greater effect.

My object is to point out how unemployment can be relieved and to induce the Government to adopt a scheme which will give a return for the money expended on it; a scheme which will secure hundreds of acres of valuable land which will be a national asset for forestry and agricultural purposes. The coastline of County Dublin must be familiar to most citizens, and I am sure that it has occurred to them, as it has occurred to me, how easy it seems to reclaim a very big stretch of land along that coast, particularly as the inlets in many cases are very small. It would secure hundreds of acres of very valuable land, which has been done in other parts of the country. If you look along that coast, you will see that, when the tides are in, there is a big stretch of country completely covered with water, and that when the tide is out there is nothing but a stretch of land covered with mud and with very little water in any part of it. When you think of that, it is very difficult to understand why the reclamation of that land has not been undertaken by private enterprise long before now.

There are many places along the coast which could be reclaimed, but I shall only refer to two in the County Dublin, and they are Malahide and Rogerstown. The inlets in those places are very narrow, and I am sure that hundreds of acres could be reclaimed with a very small outlay. Coastal reclamation is not new. It has been carried out in most of the countries of Europe, notably Holland. Thousands of acres have been reclaimed in that country along the banks of the Zuyder Zee. In Southern Italy the whole new province of Littoria has been created from reclaimed land under the Mussolini régime. In England reclamation work is going on in the Fen district, and a scheme is being prepared to reclaim the whole area of the Wash. In this country we have somewhere about 5,000 acres of land reclaimed in the County Wexford. Previous to that reclamation, that area was a whole stretch of mud-banks, but now that 5,000 acres is the most fertile grazing land in the country.

The Government and public authorities are paying thousands of pounds in relief every week to able-bodied men who cannot find work. This unemployment benefit—this free beef and free milk—no matter how you describe it, must always bear the stamp of charity. It is demoralising and should be stopped, and work, as far as possible, should be found for those able-bodied men. Irish labourers, up to now at least, never wanted charity and never would accept it. In my native county, in my young days, even the poorest of the poor would sooner starve than accept outdoor relief. I am afraid, however, that times are changing and if this system of unemployment relief, and free beef and free milk, continues, it will not be work that the labourers will be looking for, and it is not work that they will accept. They will try to continue to live on relief and it is not work that they will look for. Neither will their children look for work, but they will follow the example of their fathers and live on charity and relief.

President Roosevelt has correctly described this policy of doling out unemployment relief to able-bodied men as a narcotic and a subtle destroyer of the human spirit. That is also the opinion of all thinking people. There are many schemes which could be adopted to relieve unemployment and which would give a return for the money expended upon them. I have in mind such schemes as the draining of waterlogged land and the planting of shelter belts. Under present circumstances drainage and other work on the farm cannot possibly be undertaken by the farmers. They have no money to pay even for necessary work. I think that sort of work should be assisted in some way by the Government. As regards the hundreds of thousands of acres throughout the country that are waterlogged, it might be advisable if the Government initiated a system of drainage and I am sure most farmers would be satisfied to pay portion of the money that would be expended, in the shape of increased annuities.

There are other schemes which could be undertaken, such as giving portion of the wages which the farmer would expend on work over and above the ordinary routine business on his farm, work such as scouring ditches and other things of that sort. If a farmer were to employ men who are at present getting unemployment relief, as distinct from those who are his constant workmen, he should get portion of the wages he would pay to those people. Anything would be better than this policy of paying men to remain idle. They could adopt some scheme whereby men getting unemployment relief would be given three days' work at something more than the prevailing agricultural rate. I appeal to the Government to initiate some scheme to relieve unemployment and put an end to the demoralising effect that the dole is bringing about all over the country.

Miss Browne

I beg to second the motion. We have ample evidence everywhere of the demoralising effect of the doles. No later than this week the superintendent of home assistance told the County Wexford Board of Health that there was little doubt that owing to the conditions in rural districts and the low wages, numbers of people deliberately arranged to lose their permanent employment in order to qualify for unemployment relief or home assistance, especially since the free beef was added to the dole. That condition of affairs has been apparent to us all during the last few months. It will be greatly aggravated in another fortnight or so when the beet campaign is over, because additional numbers of men will be out of work and they will be applying for the dole. I am aware of instances, and I could give proof, where men have deliberately provoked quarrels with their employers by refusing to do certain work or by making themselves so hopelessly inefficient that no employer could keep them.

Mr. Foran

On a point of order. Is this a motion asking the Government to do a certain thing, or are Senators merely taking advantage of the opportunity to slander the unemployed in the country?

Cathaoirleach

I have considered that already. One portion of the motion has as its object the ascertaining of the proportion of such cost that would be expended in labour, and the relief of unemployment thereby afforded. I feel that that justifies the consideration of these matters.

Mr. Foran

Then it is in order to attack those people?

Cathaoirleach

I rule that the relief of unemployment can be considered.

Mr. Foran

Relief of unemployment and abuse of the unemployed are two different things.

Cathaoirleach

I will follow all those points carefully.

Miss Browne

I am merely illustrating the effect of the doles. Senator Counihan said that any kind of useful work would be better than to keep paying men to remain idle. The unemployment figure has reached an appalling total. I think the last figure was over 135,000, and that is a terrible condition of things in a country with such a small population.

Mr. Quirke

Did the Senator take her figures from the Daily Express?

Cathaoirleach

That is quite a legitimate question.

Miss Browne

I took the figures from the official report issued by the Department of Industry and Commerce. That condition of affairs is most appalling, and it makes everyone think seriously. I am not trying to score off the Government in this matter. We all have as great an interest in and as great a love for our country——

Cathaoirleach

I think Senator Foran's interjection had some bearing on the matter. If I were the Senator I would confine myself to showing how unemployment would be relieved by the particular motion under discussion. If the Senator is going to criticise the whole system of unemployment relief. I am afraid I must stop her.

Miss Browne

I will confine myself to the effect of what is known as the economic war on the farmers, and I will say that that war has made it impossible for the farmers in many cases to pay their workmen as much as a man will get in the shape of unemployment assistance. Just take into consideration the effects of the dole and the free beef scheme. These things have created a very difficult position for the farmers. I know people who have had men in their employment for years on the best possible terms——

Cathaoirleach

Senator, the point is that if they are unemployed, will you be able to show us how they could be relieved by this motion? You must not tell us the dole and all these other things are wrong. Those things are not touched on by the motion. Show us how unemployment is going to be subdued by Senator Counihan's motion? Anything of that nature I will allow you to discuss.

Miss Browne

I have tried to point out that unemployment is being created in this way and the dole and the free beef scheme are having certain effects. I fully endorse what Senator Counihan has said with regard to land reclamation and I can point to the mudlands in Wexford as an example. I do not know much about the particular place in Dublin to which the Senator's motion refers and I can only deal with that in a general way. I have, however, certain knowledge about reclamation work in Wexford. Probably before anybody here was born, back in the time of the great famine when there was distress and unemployment just as there is now, the mudlands of Wexford harbour were reclaimed by private enterprise. That work was an extraordinary success and it meant that 5,000 acres of the most valuable land was added to County Wexford. The land is free from certain diseases on account of the salt content. Prior to its reclamation it was covered by the tide. It was reclaimed with great success.

There were other areas also reclaimed, such as the sloblands at Ballyteigue. They were reclaimed successfully to the extent of several hundreds of acres. Perhaps some of that scheme was not quite so successful as in the case of Wexford harbour, but at any rate hundreds of acres of valuable land were added to the county. I think this scheme of reclaiming mudlands could be adopted by the Government. I do not doubt that it could be better done by private companies, as in the case of Wexford. In the present circumstances, however, the work could be undertaken for the purpose of employing many people who are now getting the dole. There is plenty of other work that could be undertaken. I know farms where, owing to the impossibility of paying labour or getting men to do such work as the cleaning of ditches and drains, a lot of the best of land is deteriorating in value, being overgrown with rushes. The drains are stopped and the drainage done years ago is now of no use. No farmer would be able to get work of that kind done on his own. He could not afford to pay for it out of his own pocket. It would be very desirable, I think, if some scheme could be devised whereby grants might be given by the Government for the doing of that class of work. Unemployed men could be engaged out of the Government grants instead of having money distributed to them in doles. An arrangement might be made so that the farmer whose land was benefited would pay a proportion of the cost. Schemes of that kind would be very useful indeed. I do not know whether they would have much effect now, because as we read in the newspapers a few days ago, there is now going to be a general revaluation of the land of the country and that will not encourage people to carry out improvements.

Cathaoirleach

That particular matter is outside the terms of this motion and may not be discussed.

Miss Browne

The schemes that I was referring to a moment ago would, if undertaken, provide employment for people in the rural districts, and particularly during the next three months, when there will be greatly increased unemployment in the tillage areas. I desire to support the motion.

Mr. Farren

When I read the motion I asked myself what reason Senator Counihan had for putting it down. I was troubled to know what exactly was behind it, but the Senator was not long on his feet until we learned what his object was, namely, to make an attack on the unfortunate unemployed farm labourers in the country.

Mr. Counihan

Not at all.

Mr. Farren

He was ably seconded by Senator Miss Browne, most of whose speech concerned itself with an attack on labourers because of the fact that they happened to be unfortunate enough to be unemployed, and because this Christian State attempts to do something to relieve the consequent distress. Senator Counihan, in moving his motion, dwelt at great length and laid strong emphasis on the fact that the unemployed labourers of the country were getting doles and, if you please, free beef. But, in the course of his speech, he never referred to the fact that for very many years the farmers of Ireland have been getting grants—the agricultural grant and other grants. Of course, it was no crime for the farmers to accept grants, but it is a crime for unfortunate labouring men with wives and families depending on them to do so: men who are able and willing to work. Because, being denied the opportunity of providing for themselves and their families, the State steps in and passes an Unemployment Assistance Act to enable these unfortunate people to keep body and soul together, we have had these tirades from Senator Counihan and Senator Miss Browne to-day. Senator Miss Browne talked about the position in which labourers had put themselves. She said that they had made themselves inefficient in order that they might get dismissed from their employment.

Miss Browne

On a point of order. These were not my words. What I said was that these were the words of the home assistance official in County Wexford. He used them in the report that he made to the County Wexford Board of Health. They are not my words at all.

Mr. Farren

Well, at least Senator Miss Browne quoted them. From my experience of some of the farmer-employers in this country, and the miserable wages they offer to these unfortunate men, I would not be a bit surprised if they did that. They would at least be better off than working for some of those large-hearted people that we hear about. The Labour Party does not believe in, or stand for, this system of doles for anybody. We believe that man has the God-given right to get useful employment, and that in return for his labour he should be paid a sufficient wage to enable him to live without having to get charity from anybody. But we know, unfortunately, that that is not possible, due to the introduction of modern machinery. It has been responsible for displacing thousands of men so that the inventors may become millionaires. The result is that thousands of workers are thrown on the scrap heap and that there is not sufficient employment to go around. But there is no reason why there could not be sufficient employment. If the advice of the Labour Party, as embodied in its programme of reconstruction which was submitted to the first Dáil and to both of the Governments which have been in power in this country since, had been adopted, much useful work could have been undertaken and that would have been better for everybody concerned. It would be better for people to be getting useful employment than assistance. But, unless we are prepared to put back the hands of the clock, I am afraid that both here and in every country in the world we are going to have large numbers unemployed.

Cathaoirleach

Would the Senator now come down to bedrock?

Mr. Farren

I submit that I am dealing with the motion, a motion which asks that certain works of reconstruction be undertaken. In my opinion, the objects which the motion sets out to achieve can only be achieved if they are carried out in a national way and on a large scale. I was rather surprised at seeing this motion on the Order Paper, because it is pretty well known that a programme of reconstruction works on a large scale, embracing such matters as are dealt with in this motion, has been put before the Government. I do not think it is the duty of the Government to deal with these suggested works in a parochial or local way. This motion speaks of the County Dublin, but I do not think it is the business of the Legislature to deal with such important issues as these in a parochial way. It is the duty of the State to consider all these matters in a national sense. The unemployed in Cork, Galway, Kerry and in every other county in the Free State have as much claim on the consideration of the Government as the unemployed in the County Dublin. This is a matter that should be engaging, and I believe is engaging, the attention of the Executive Government. It is the duty of the Government to provide useful schemes of work and remunerative employment for people who are unemployed and who are entitled either to employment or maintenance.

Mr. Fitzgerald

I am not going to insinuate that the underlying arguments of Senator Counihan were motivated by anything but the very best of intentions, but his motion as it stands is condemned out of his own arguments. Firstly, he drew attention himself to the very local and rather parochial aspect of his motion. I am just wondering, as a new Senator, if this motion is passed what is going to happen to the sheaves of similar motions which we are going to have coming from Wexford, Galway, Cork, Tralee and other places around the coast where not alone the problems mentioned in this motion, but such problems as coast erosion are causing very serious concern. I am just wondering what those interested—in my opinion, in the more practical schemes of internal drainage—think about this proposal? The only chance, in my opinion, that Senator Counihan had of getting a motion such as this passed was to have dropped its local aspect and put his proposal forward from a national point of view. But, even from that point of view, there are objections. I do not know what power of initiation this Assembly has. I look upon the other House of the Oireachtas as the initiating body and, as Senator Counihan has friends there, a measure could be introduced to deal with problems of such serious magnitude. As the motion reads it stands condemned by some of the arguments that were used in its favour; that this is not the correct line of approach and, in my opinion, is not a very practical line of approach.

There is an Inter-Departmental Committee in existence for dealing with this question, and advertisements appeared in the Press calling for suggestions not alone from public bodies but from individuals. This motion is rather belated, as the final date for the reception of schemes for the putting of the unemployed to work is drawing to a close. The proper line of approach would have been for the Senator—if he is not a member of a local authority—to get some friends on such a body to discuss it. This motion should engage the attention of the Dublin County Council or the coastal borough bodies which are in a position to bring forward sound arguments in its favour. We have had general principles enunciated by Senator Counihan; we have had no facts. Public bodies have engineers and surveyors in their employment who have, in the course of their professional capacity, examined this situation. It will surprise me if something like what is suggested here has not been before local authorities. I read in to-day's Press that a rather big project has been suggested in County Dublin, consisting of the making of a marine lake where the labour content would reach the magnitude of 80 per cent. Whether it is practical or not, I do not know. That is a practical line of approach. Probably a description of such a scheme has been sent in to the Inter-Departmental Committee. While, in the main, I agree with the principle underlying the motion, I will be compelled to vote against it. We all realise the difficulties of the unemployment situation. Measures have been taken by the Government, with a serious sense of their responsibility, to deal with what we all hope is but a temporary situation. While we realise the seriousness of the problem, I take it that we are all agreed upon the necessity of curing it. The motion should be altered to make it a national one, when it will become a serious one for this House to discuss and to see if there is a more practical line of approach to its solution.

Donnchadh O hÉaluighthe

Ní cheist nua é seo agus bhí súil agam go n-innseochadh an Seanadóir do chur an Rún seo os ár gcomhair cionnus an obair seo do dhéanamh ach níor dhein.

As this is no new question it should be discussed on the merits, in order to raise it above the level in which it was discussed here by previous speakers. We have a very long coastline with a number of estuaries, bays and inlets. I was a follower of Mr. Arthur Griffith. I read his writings closely, possibly 40 years ago, when he dealt with the reclamation of land along the coast. I remember distinctly that he described what had been done to the Landes on the north-west coast of France in the way of reclamation work, and told how they were subsequently planted. If something like that had been done in this country we might not now have to be paying exorbitant bills to foreign countries for the timber used in our housing schemes. If we go further along the north coast of Europe, we find what was done in Ostend and on the Zuyder Zee in Holland. Anyone who read the late Mr. Erskine Childers' book, "The Riddle of the Sands," will remember that there was in it an appeal for reclamation work at the mouth of the Elbe and along that coast. Recently, we find that the new leader of Italy has converted what was possibly something like fever swamps into good land. If we go back further we find that in the 17th century the English did some reclamation work in the Humber and that land was reclaimed from which there is now derived a revenue of about £10,000 per annum.

While I do not agree with some of the remarks of my colleague, Senator Fitzgerald, I think any work that tends to increase the area of the State is good work, because reclamation really means an addition to the area of the State. Some reclamation work was carried out on the Foyle some years ago, and Senator Lynch will be able to tell us what was done on the Fergus. In Senator Counihan's native county, I think he can speak of what was done there, because within 30 miles of where he lived reclamation was carried out in an estuary of Kenmare Bay. Reclamation work has also been done on the Lee, the Barrow and the Suir. I agree with Senator Fitzgerald that the motion should not be confined to County Dublin, but should take in the country as a whole. Anyone who knows the coast of County Dublin knows how it lends itself to reclamation work. Outside Skerries, there is a little island and it should not be very difficult to build a promenade to connect the town with that island and make it a beautiful health resort. Anybody travelling along the railway line from Malahide to Donabate will have seen the tract of land around there which leads as far as Seatown, Swords, along the Broadmeadow river. Then we come to Senator O'Neill's stronghold, Portmarnock, where there is a lovely strand which would lend itself to reclamation.

Let us now come to the Bay of Dublin and to what has been done there and in the City. Dublin itself is largely built on reclaimed land. If you take up any history of Dublin you will find that the whole north side, from Ballybough Bridge along by Beresford Place and up as far as Capel Street Bridge, is largely reclaimed land, and the names of some of the streets proclaim that, because you have Newfoundland Street, which derives its name from the fact that it is newly made land. We can also read that in the past the Duke of Leinster came in a boat from the north side to his town residence, Leinster House. In the Bay of Dublin, a new park has been made entirely by the Dublin Corporation, with all its faults. I remember when the sea waves washed the wall along the Fairview Road and so does Senator O'Neill. It is now a beautifully filled-in park, and further reclamation work is being carried out by the same body in the Dollymount direction. The Dublin Port and Docks Board has reclaimed land to add to its docks space. It has already reclaimed 80 acres, and a further 36 acres are now in process of reclamation.

I am rather disappointed that Senator Counihan did not give us any very clear indication of what might be done apart from these relief works and I am going to make a suggestion now which may not be worth the paper it may be written on. There is a corner of the Bay of Dublin along by Monkstown and it would seem to me that if a line were drawn from Dun Laoghaire harbour up to Seapoint or Blackrock and the corner filled in, as has been done by the Dublin Corporation in Fairview, there is no reason why, in the future—after all, we have got to think of the future—it should not be utilised as an aeroplane base. You would then have a ship terminus, a railway terminus and an aeroplane base in the one spot. It may be very costly but if full value is got for the cost, it would be all to the good. I may be asked how that could be filled in. There are two ways of reclaiming land. One way is to build embankments and the other, to fill in material, as has been done in Fairview. My idea in regard to the Monkstown project would be to fill it in. I am not going to dictate to the Dun Laoghaire Borough Council as to how they should conduct their business, but, at all events, we know that the Blackrock township in its day filled in and elevated Blackrock Park and we know that they are now engaged in similar work along by Williamstown and Booterstown. There is no reason why, if this was done in a national way, it could not be carried out if the project was taken up seriously between the two corporations. I do not think it would take very long to fill up this place if we added to it the cleansing of the streets of the city. Instead of being destroyed in destructors, the refuse could be carried out there.

Coming now to the so-much talked of Blue Lagoon, these things are all very fine in their way. There may be a time in the near or distant future when these beautiful projects can be carried out, but there are some of us in the City of Dublin who are conversant with the situation in the city and while there are as many as 14 human beings living in one room, some of us, at all events, will not countenance the spending of the citizens' money on these fantastic projects until the housing problem of Dublin is solved. When that has been done, these other suggestions may get attention. I do not see any objection in the world to passing this motion, provided that it gets a national complexion rather than a local or county complexion, but in connection with the points I have raised, I would suggest to Senator Counihan that he should alter paragraph (d) by the inclusion of the words "or any other useful purposes." The purposes are limited to agricultural or forestry purposes as it stands. If this reclamation work could fulfil some useful purpose, as in the case of the work carried out by the Dublin Corporation and the Dublin Port and Docks Board, it would be all to the good, but the manner in which this is worded would cut that out.

As I say, I do not see any objection in the world to passing this motion provided it gets a national complexion rather than a parochial or county complexion. I understand that the Government have had this question under consideration for some time and I believe that, in years gone by, when Mr. Arthur Griffith was writing about these things, if you had had a national Government, these questions would not be left until now without being dealt with. I think it ought to be passed and I hope the Government will give it due consideration.

Mr. Foran

Would I be in order at this stage in moving an amendment?

Cathaoirleach

It would depend on what the amendment was. It is possible to make only a very small amendment to a motion.

Mr. Foran

I move that the words "in County Dublin" be deleted. If that were done, the House would be unanimous in passing the motion.

Cathaoirleach

I think it would be quite possible to delete those words if Senator Counihan agrees.

Mr. Counihan

I agree to that.

Motion amended accordingly.

Mr. Foran

I think that speaks for itself. I think the motion had unfortunate sponsors who ignored its main point in order to attack certain people in the country. I am not going to follow them in that line of argument. I think the matter is more important and should be treated in a serious manner, and I think it is unfortunate that the people who are moving in this matter should attack the most unfortunate people in the community. It does not help their object in any way. I appeal to them to try and remove from their minds altogether the venom which they appear to have against the unemployed. It is not their fault that they are unemployed; they are victims of one kind or another. It is very unbecoming for people in fairly good positions to take advantage of that to abuse and slander people who are not in a position to answer for themselves.

Mr. Lynch

I do not propose to occupy the attention of the House for any length of time in dealing with this motion. With the permission of the House I just wish to place a few considerations before it for consideration. I would suggest that this motion is both inopportune and unpractical. I would suggest that it is inopportune at the present time to ask the Executive Council to start on an examination of a question of this sort, as to the possibility of the reclamation of lands from tidal waters. It is inopportune, because it is certain to take some time, and the problem of unemployment is one that cannot be dealt with by stopping short; it has to be dealt with in a practical and rapid way if it is to be dealt with at all, so as to be effective in curing the evils aimed at by the Government.

This question of the reclamation of lands from tidal waters is one of a very difficult and perhaps of a very scientific kind. So difficult is it that old people say that what you take from the tide the tide has a habit of taking back again. Those who know anything about the reclamation of land from tidal waters know that that consequence has frequently occurred where it has been tried. It was tried in the Fergus reclamation works by private enterprise some 50 years ago. The reclamation there of 500 or 600 acres of lands swallowed any amount of money. The land was reclaimed, apparently effectively, by the erection of very big battlements to protect it from a small tidal river. It was excellent land, as Senator Miss Browne indicated such slobland would be, for four or five years. It gave great crops of beans and was excellent land for grazing cattle on account of the saline properties associated with the grass that grew there. What happened? At the end of five years a big tide came with a storm and went over the bank and when it went over, of course, it had to go out. It could not go out over the bank but it swept the bank away at a corner and all the money was lost.

That 500 or 600 acres remained for about 20 years, when some enterprising person purchased the slobland from the bankruptcy official, I suppose, who had charge of the realisation of the property, for a nominal sum and proceeded, about 300 or 400 yards further in, to make an embankment enclosing a smaller quantity of land with a large amount of slobland outside the embankment which would be a protection against the strength of the tidal waters in case of a storm. That was also apparently a great success for about ten years, or perhaps less, when the tide came in again and swept away the embankment when going out. Now it is slobland again. If Senator Counihan means to ask the Executive Council to enter into an inquiry as to the practicability of reclaiming any particular piece of slobland from tidal waters; to stop the other means which they are adopting for solving the question of unemployment and start an inquiry which would not be at all useful, except you have very expert evidence before you, and go to the expense and the waste of time and the absurdity of that at the present time, when so many obvious means are suggested for dealing with the problem of unemployment, such a proposal is, I would respectfully suggest, both inopportune and unpractical.

I did not intend to interfere in this discussion because the matter had been so well dealt with by people who are competent to deal with it, but it is one in which I take a great interest, because I have seen the effects of endeavouring to reclaim lands from the operation of tidal waters. I have seen the difficulties of it, and it is not a thing that can be done in a casual and haphazard way. It requires scientific inquiry and is unsuitable at the present time. There are other means of dealing with the problem of unemployment. I understand that these means are being resorted to. Whether they will succeed or not is a matter for prophecy. Whether they are practical or not remains to be seen, and, of course, the Government must run the risk of being censured by Senator Counihan and Senator Miss Browne as to the methods adopted in dealing with the problem. I suggest, however, that at the present time this motion is one which could have no good result whatever and would rather reflect on the House if passed in its present form.

Minister for Lands (Mr. Connolly)

This motion has raised quite a number of points, some of them very interesting, some of them very helpful, and others of them not so useful. I do not wish to go into any great detail with regard to it. I think it is not altogether unhealthy that a matter like this should be brought up here. It indicates to me that Senator Counihan has changed his base somewhat, and has got a new type of motion, which he can move at intervals. The parochial nature of the motion does, in my opinion, militate against it. There is also the fact that considerable attention is being paid to the problem of finding useful public works for the relief of unemployment, and that this Inter-Departmental Committee has been meeting and working intensively on the problem.

Various suggestions will, no doubt, emerge from the work of that Committee. I hope when they do emerge we will find that interest and backing from Senator Counihan and his friends on the main issue that will be involved in such proposals. I allude to the cost, the necessity for finding the finances for such works, possibly resulting in taxation. I am all in favour of public works, and I think most of us here and elsewhere are in favour of the policy of providing employment rather than relief money for unemployment or public assistance. But it has to be remembered that the unemployment problem cannot be solved on the lines that Senator Counihan indicates when he says "start work immediately." One has to have a scientific, technical and an experienced basis to work on.

It is well known that certain public works are very high in labour content, and that certain other public works are very low in labour content. The desire or the necessity is to get a combination of essential public works that will be of permanent value to the State and give a high labour content. Even with unlimited money and great resources it is not an easy matter in this country to start public works of a beneficial nature. It is true that we have available engineering experts, surveyors and planning, but we have not had that intensive national interest in our expert staffs. When I speak of this I am speaking of the engineering forces and the different other highly technical qualifications that are needed to plan, carry out and administer such works.

I have seen the unemployment problem faced in other countries. I am reasonably aware of that problem as it is facing President Roosevelt in America to-day. With unlimited capital, with no limit to the money that will be made available for public works, it is there found almost impossible to face this problem as we would like to see it faced. That brings me to another issue—what the Americans call technological employment—and it is a peculiar thing that the more intensively industrial a country is, the less employment pro rata it will provide. I have experience of that in my own small way with the Gaeltacht industries, where we are trying to provide uneconomic employment in scattered areas. In the very nature of things industrialisation goes to militate against units in a remote area where large scale production does not operate.

One point that was made to-day, which I wish to deal with now, and it is the main reason why I am speaking on this motion, was the question of unemployment. Senator Miss Browne, I think, it was who referred to the unemployment figures. She quoted the figures of last week. I am rather glad she did, because it gives me an opportunity of referring to the unemployment figures which had been published by the Press. These figures have been heavily leaded in the Press here and equally heavily leaded in the Press across the water. Our unemployment figures at the moment mean something very different to what unemployment figures meant three years ago. At that time the people registered at the Labour Exchanges for benefit. In the main, registering at the Labour Exchanges meant the registering of those people who anticipated the drawing of benefits through unemployment insurance. When it came to a question of giving out relief works throughout the country, the present Administration decided, definitely, and at the beginning, that all those who sought relief work would have to be registered at the Labour Exchanges. They even went so far as to insist on those people in outlying districts registering through postcards in their postal area. That arrangement has enormously increased the number registered as unemployed and has created altogether a different state of things to that which existed three years ago.

Then the further step was taken under the Unemployment Assistance Act which gives to every person who is available for work the right, under certain means qualifications, of getting certain benefits. We know that practically every small farmer in the Gaeltacht, for instance, and in the Western seaboard registered for unemployment assistance. Many of those people, in fact most of them, have houses and small holdings. They are available at times for relief works or for unemployment assistance up to a certain point. I want to make it clear that the figures published now are a complete analysis of those who claim for unemployment assistance or unemployment insurance. We are satisfied —and I think the trade unions and the trade organisations through their societies will bear out what I say—that there is considerably more employment at the present time than there ever has been in recent times in Ireland. The explanation of the unemployment figures to which Senator Miss Browne has referred is found in the facts I have stated.

This unemployment problem is unfortunately not confined to any one country. It is prevalent all over the world. It is found in the United States, in England and in Germany. We have our share of it here. It is entirely desirable that people be provided with the means of earning what was given to them rather than that they should suffer from the demoralising effects of the dole. But it is not going to be suggested at this hour of the day that those for whom work cannot be provided are going to be deprived of public assistance, unemployment assistance or free beef. I object very much to that being dubbed charity. It is not charity for an unemployed worker to draw unemployment assistance. These unemployed are a State responsibility, and they are accepted as such. We are not living in the days of the 1850's, when soup kitchens and charities were handled in that way. We are living in a period when States all over the world accept responsibility for their citizens. That is a state of things that is going to exist and to continue.

With regard to the provision of public works, I am not sure that these public works or the scheme that has been put forward by Senator Counihan is a practical proposition. I will undertake to see that it is brought to the attention of the Inter-Departmental Committee which is where Senator Counihan should have sent it. I understand with regard to this particular work that an examination was made in 1920, and that it was found that it would be a practical engineering job. But it is very questionable whether it would be an economic work in any sense, or that the resultant lands would be of any real value. I am not in a position to express any views on that matter. It will be the work of the Inter-Departmental Committee to investigate such things amongst many other things that are under consideration at the moment.

There are many types of reclamation, of course, possible. In my particular Department certain experiments have been made with regard to internal reclamation—reclamation of bogs, the reclamation of large areas and the plantation of the people on the soil. Several of these schemes have been costly. I think all reclamation will be found to be costly. Some of them have disclosed a great difference of opinion amongst the people in the area as to the advisability and the advantage of carrying out reclamation of this type. My own feeling about the matter, as a result of whatever little experience I have had, is that the best type of reclamation I can see in the country is that in which small farmers who are living adjacent to bogland, are encouraged by grants to reclaim additional acreage within their own holdings. That, I think, has worked out fairly satisfactorily under the Department of Agriculture. In my opinion they have not gone far enough. I hope to see them going further The reason that is the most successful form of reclamation is that it does throw the responsibility for the value of the reclaimed land on the owner of the land. In other words, if you pay him a grant of £5 per acre, if he has to undertake the work himself and knows that he will own the land afterwards, that will result in his putting his best efforts into working the land and into making it really worth while. The State responsibility is definitely fixed. The money is paid over on the results achieved. He is given a certain grant at the beginning of the work and then, if he is successful in reclaiming the bog, acre by acre, he is paid the balance. The grant works out at £5 per acre.

I think that it is the most desirable type of reclamation in this country at present. It might be much more widely extended. I mention that because the motion deals mainly with the reclamation idea. I am not in a position to offer any opinion on the various suggestions such as Senator Healy and others have made. I do not see anything particularly objectionable in Senator Counihan's motion which can be dealt with by the Inter-Departmental Committee. I think there is a great deal in the point that has been made that the motion is too parochialised and that, instead of dealing with the matter from the national point of view, the Senator has dealt with his own immediate area around Dublin. I agree with Senator Farren's analysis of the labour position. I have explained my own views as to how these figures are constituted. I must certainly say that so long as the Government is in power it will take cognisance of the fact that those citizens who cannot be provided with work must be provided with reasonable maintenance, until work is available or we are in a position to provide it.

Sir John P. Griffith

I have listened with considerable interest to the discussion but there has been no reference made to the fact that the question of coast erosion, the reclamation of tidal areas and afforestation, has been examined by a very powerful Royal Commission within the last 25 years. The full details are well worth studying for those who are interested in the question. I have done a considerable amount of that study myself and have come to the conclusion that the suggested reclamations referred to in the motion would be very expensive and of very doubtful utility both in their use afterwards and in the use of unemployed labour. The question of unemployed labour was fully discussed at the Royal Commission to which I have referred in connection with these reclamations in tidal areas. I have come to the conclusion that several of the speakers to-day thought of this question rather too much in the sense of local improvements, whilst we know that the unemployment problem is a national one. I have placed my views before Ministers very strongly from time to time in regard to the question of the reclamation of bogland on which the Minister for Lands spoke here to-day. We have got millions of acres of bogland and they would provide admirable work for almost any class of labour. I certainly would suggest that if the terms of this motion are placed before any committee, they should not be limited to the schemes that have been proposed for the County Dublin. My own impression is that if the reclamation of 800 acres of land at Malahide were undertaken it would cost something like £500 an acre if it is done economically. If it is done merely by hand labour, it would be an endless job because there are 800 acres to be raised some ten feet or so. I do not wish to throw cold water, if possible, on any efforts to utilise the unemployed but I do not really think that we can look to this scheme as a very fruitful source of help.

Mr. Comyn

This motion has led to a very valuable discussion, a discussion which is particularly valuable by reason of the statement of policy which we have received from the Minister and the speech made by Senator Sir John Griffith, an engineer of the greatest eminence. I was glad to see that on all sides the opinion is that work rather than doles should be provided for the people. I was particularly pleased to hear from Senator Farren that it is work men want and not charity. How is work to be provided? If you like, some work may be provided in the reclamation of the inlets around the coast of Ireland, but it seems to me that that is not the most urgent, the most profitable or the most universal kind of work that could be engaged in. Senator Lynch has told you about the attempt to reclaim the very fertile reaches of the Fergus. I think that if many of the schemes suggested in speeches here this evening were carried out they would merely mean a reclamation of sandbanks.

Senator Sir John Griffith told you that the reclamation of the coast of Co. Dublin up at Malahide would cost £500 or £800 per acre. Have you considered at all the fact that beautiful sandy beaches available for the public would be converted into fields, some of them good fields and some of them very bad fields? I have given a lot of thought as to the way in which employment can be given in this country and the sums expended on the dole reduced. I think it is an axiom that it is much more economic to improve land that is above the sea level than to endeavour to win from the sea land which is around our coast. There is plenty of employment and plenty of room for employment in the reclamation of land all over the country, particularly the reclamation of bogland and swampy land. Throughout the world there are millions of people at present unemployed. Perhaps it is impossible to find employment for all these people in the highly industrialised cities, but I deny that it is impossible to find employment for all the people in this country. There are plenty of opportunities for the full employment of the people of this country. These opportunities can be provided by the inland reclamation of land. I say now without hesitation, in the presence of men of experience and eminence, that employment in the reclamation and improvement of land would be economic and would return a full reward for the money expended. The employment figure of 125,000 or thereabouts has been mentioned. We know that this is, to a certain degree, artificial, by reason of the fact that no person can get employment on relief works unless he is registered. We know that there are thousands and, perhaps, tens of thousands registered now who would not, in ordinary circumstances, have been registered as unemployed. Making due allowance for that, I submit that there are thousands reluctantly receiving doles at present who should get remunerative employment. I was glad to hear that the Minister accepted responsibility for finding employment or providing some sort of payment for these men. The statement was categorically made here that responsibility is accepted. It follows that the Government must examine every scheme for the provision of employment. No great objection could be taken to the scheme proposed by Senator Counihan, with the amendment proposed by Senator Foran, that an examination be made of the tidal inlets. That examination can be very short and very simple, having regard to the findings of the Royal Commission mentioned by Senator Sir John Griffith. Full inquiry and examination need not consist of anything more than reading the Report of that Royal Commission. When that is done, it will be found that the most remunerative method of employment would be by reclaiming and improving the land which Nature has won from the sea. I am particularly anxious that our public men should realise that, in finding employment for the people, the great source is the land.

Cathaoirleach

We are concerned with the sea now, but you are ignoring the sea altogether.

Mr. Comyn

I wish the sea would ignore the land which, from time to time, has been reclaimed from it. Senator Lynch called attention to the reclamation that took place on the Fergus, where banks were built up. The sea, was, however, more vigilant than the people who were interested in the land. It lapped over the bank, a capful at a time, and, when it had made a little breach, down came the whole thing. Why I say that attention should be given to reclamation inland is——

Cathaoirleach

This motion is concerned with the sea. If each Senator gets up to advocate his own pet scheme, we shall have no finality.

Mr. Comyn

In any work of reclamation, regard must be had, in the first place, to the labour content.

Cathaoirleach

That is relevant to the motion.

Mr. Comyn

There is no use in having public works carried out if the engineering expenses, the preparation of maps and other things, use up most of the grant and leave only a small portion for the man who gives his sweat and daily labour to the work. This discussion has, I think, done good, and the motion with the amendment might be accepted without doing any harm. It does not, however, deal with the entire problem.

Mr. Healy

May I put a question?

Cathaoirleach

You have spoken already.

Mr. Healy

I merely want to put a question.

Cathaoirleach

The Senator may make a personal explanation, but he cannot ask a question.

Mr. O'Neill

Naturally, as one who was bred, born and reared in North County Dublin, I take an interest in anything that is brought forward concerning it. I am sufficiently national in my outlook to agree with the motion as amended. The reason I have risen is merely to recall, as a matter of interest, that the lands mentioned by Senator Counihan were included in a scheme adopted so far back as the days of Grattan's Parliament in 1782. I do not propose to take much further part in the debate as the question has been fully thrashed out already. When I heard my friend Senator Lynch, and my friend Senator Sir John Griffith say that it is very difficult to reclaim such land, it occurred to me to ask: "What about Holland?" If the Hollanders can do it, I do not see why the Irelanders cannot do it also.

Mr. Counihan

I had no intention, in speaking to this motion, to offend any section of the House, no matter what their political views might be. I think that the attack made on me by Senator Foran and Senator Farren was unjust and uncalled for. The only idea I had in moving the motion was to point out to the Government a way of relieving unemployment. I pointed out, in the course of my speech, the evil effects which I believe the handing out of this dole will have on the unemployed. I am entitled to my opinion and I have very high authority to back it up—no less a person than the President of the United States.

Senator Foran said I should not have launched such an attack upon the unemployed; he said I was slandering the unemployed. I fail to see where I made one single unjust remark in my speech. The unemployed have my sympathy just as much as they have the sympathy of Senator Foran, but I do not start blowing my own horn on every hilltop. When matters come to be reckoned up it may be found that there are as many good works to my credit in regard to the unemployed as Senator Foran has to his credit. I have been accused of moving a parochial motion. I asked that this coastal reclamation should be examined. I thought it better to name some inlets on which a try-out could be made. I think those I mentioned were the best places and that is the reason for my naming County Dublin. Senator Fitzgerald is new to this House but he thinks it is inferior to deal with this matter as compared with the Dáil or the county councils; he said this motion would be more suitably moved in the Dáil. I do not think so. I think it is eminently suitable for discussion in this House. Senator Lynch and also, I think, Senator Sir John Griffith disagree with the reclamation of coastal inlets. Senator Lynch touched on the money expended on the reclamation of the Fergus. It is possible he is right in what he said. I know the Fergus, but I do not know the land that has been reclaimed there. I would point out to Senator Lynch the slobland in Wexford that has been reclaimed, and where the embankments have stood the tests for more than 100 years. It is amongst the most fertile land in the country. I could point out to Senator Lynch land in the County Kerry that has also been reclaimed and where the embankments have stood the test. If the embankments on the Fergus are not what they should be, it must be due to bad engineering and bad work. Senator Lynch also said that this was not an opportune time to make these suggestions. I cannot agree with that. Only a fortnight ago the Board of Works invited everybody in the country to send in suggestions for relief works. I sent in a statement in reply to that invitation to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance, who is in charge of the work.

All I ask in this motion is that an examination should be made of certain tidal inlets. I think Senator Comyn said that the inlets that I suggested should be reclaimed were only sandbanks. That is not so. These inlets that I mentioned are mudbanks. When the tide is out they are completely covered with mud and a little sand. But even if they were sandbanks, we all know the value of sandy soil in these districts for the market gardens. We all know the value of the land around Rush and Lusk and Skerries, and we know how valuable that land is from the market gardeners' point of view, and we know how industrious and well off are the people living in these localities. I am satisfied with the way the Minister for Lands received my motion and with his statement that it would be brought before the proper quarter. That statement was tantamount to accepting the motion which I moved. He said that he would do what my motion required him to do and I certainly have no objection to that statement. I think Senator Farren need not have been so bitter in his attack on Senator Miss Browne and myself.

Motion, as amended, put and declared carried.

The Seanad adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until Wednesday, 30th January, at 3 p.m.