Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 18 Jan 1973

Vol. 74 No. 3

Appropriation Act, 1972: Motion (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:

That Seanad Éireann notes the supply services and purposes to which sums have been appropriated in the Appropriation Act, 1972.

Mrs. Robinson

Before the House rose last night I had been making some serious criticisms of the performance of the Oireachtas throughout the legislative year. I looked to the number of days on which we sat, to the legislation with which we dealt, and to specific Acts, in supporting these criticisms. I tried to provide constructive suggestions as to how the Oireachtas can become more relevant and play a more creative part in the life of the country.

One suggestion was the introduction of a select committee on State-sponsored bodies to review the work of public enterprises. I supported this both from the point of view of the need for an overall watchdog in view of the many areas in which we have State-sponsored bodies, and the new dimension, the effect of European policies on our public enterprises. When the House rose I was considering the way in which the Oireachtas must adapt itself to membership of the EEC by having a committee which will be flexible enough to be able to respond to Community legislation and to influence Community policy.

I suggested that this committee will require to have the form of a standing committee, in that it will be necessary to have a permanent committee sitting to sift and examine Community regulations and directives, and also the powers of a select committee. It must be able to inform itself, and be able to call experts before it and it must be able to review the general policies of the Community while the matters are still in draft. The Committee can then report and elicit the view of the Oireachtas on these policies. The Oireachtas can then influence the proposals before final decisions are taken.

This morning I should like to turn to some other matters under the Appropriation Act, taking first of all the functioning of the Department of Education. Once again there is the problem of a piecemeal approach and the lack of a real policy. I should like to illustrate this particularly in relation to our policy on youth. Last December we amended the Constitution in order to give votes at 18 years. This should not just be a formal change; it should be an appreciation of the part which youth can and ought to be allowed to play in the life of the country.

It is not sufficient to vote a particular sum of money for youth as we did in the 1969 budget when we voted £100,000 for youth. This is now £160,000 which, I understand, is shared between youth and sport. This is a bad mix. We should distinguish sport as a separate category and have a genuine youth policy which includes a policy on out-of-school education. We should define the link between the school, the voluntary bodies in the community, and the parents. This ought to be done in a comprehensive way.

I should like to refer to the thinking on this which is evident in the "National Youth Policy" which has been brought out by the National Youth Council of Ireland in an attempt to steer the Government towards this type of approach. I should like to quote briefly from pages 8 and 9 of that report which refers to the need for a national youth policy:

In establishing a balance between educational development and economic growth, the Government should involve all the interests of the nation in deciding educational priorities and set down a comprehensive and national plan for the development of human resources, and the democratic organisation of education.

The Government should publish a White Paper outlining the developments which have taken place in Irish education in the 1960's and make a clear and comprehensive statement of policy for educational development in the 1970's.

Educational development should be community controlled and involve the participation of teachers, parents and students in partnership with those who provide educational services.

This general statement, which has been put forward as part of the national youth policy, applies across the board to our policy in education. There is far too little knowledge of what is happening, far too little responsiveness to educationalists and to thinkers and those who wish to influence this policy. The dialogue between the Department of Education and either educational bodies or voluntary organisations with an interest is much too one-sided. Deputations go to the Department of Education with proposals and there is no positive response to this. There is no clear refusal to consider the matter; there is merely a long silence. There must be a change in outlook and a more positive response to the demand for a coherent policy and for community involvement in education at all levels in this country.

I want to turn now to the question of prisons under this heading in the Appropriation Act and to refer to the serious questions that are being asked at the moment about our prison system. I have some first hand knowledge of prisons because Senator West and I have visited various institutions dealing with juveniles and, most recently, St. Patrick's Institution in preparation for the motion on the Kennedy Report which we tabled in the Seanad. There are good things as well as bad things to report. We noted the fact that the Dublin Vocational Educational Committee are now providing classes in St. Patrick's. This had only begun when we visited, and we propose to pay another visit in a short while to assess how these classes have been progressing since they began at the beginning of November.

This is something that needs to be examined in depth, not just by the Department and officials, but by the community and particularly by the judiciary. I have been depressed by the lack of awareness by members of the judiciary of conditions in Irish prisons, particularly conditions to which they sentence young people without knowing whether they are getting educational opportunities or whether they are being rehabilitated and whether the sentence is an appropriate one in view of the conditions. A lesson could be learned from the awareness of the judiciary in Britain of the need for knowledge of the conditions in prisons. There is a need for a follow up of where a person is being sent; whether this is the appropriate institution; and whether it is providing the appropriate rehabilitation or possibility of educational opportunity in the case of juvenile offenders. The whole question of the conditions in our prisons and our attitude towards them is gravely in need of reform.

I also want to comment on consumer protection. Anybody who picked up a daily newspaper this morning could see that once again, and by no means for the first or even second time in the past year, the National Prices Commission has stolen the headlines. The impact this body has had in its monthly reports is remarkable. This is also true of its occasional papers on prices and on various bodies such as the occasional paper on CIE rates and fares in December. It is indicative of the lack of study and protection in this area prior to the setting up of the National Prices Commission. It is amazing that a body which has power only to recommend can have had such an impact in this area in so short a time. We do not have proper consumer protection through our legislation. We do not have any equivalent of the British statutes such as the Trade Descriptions Act and the number of Consumer Protection Acts which have been introduced there.

Recently the Fair Trading Bill was tabled and was published in December. It is an indication of how fast we must be prepared to move in this area of consumer protection. The crucial point in this British Bill is that it will empower the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, on the recommendation of the Director General of Fair Trading, and the Consumer Protection Advisory Committee, to lay an order before Parliament prohibiting or controlling any trade practices which he considers to be against the consumers' economic interest, including advertising practices.

In this country we are still at the primitive stage of assessing price increases. We do not have obligations for correct descriptions, weight, colour and so on. We do not have the protection from deceptive advertising. Advertisements for all goods which are sold on credit should show in large and clear lettering the cash price, the total price, including the interest, and the true rate of interest calculated. In many ways the advertisements are deceptive and the consumer lacks the necessary protection in this area. Our safety precautions are inadequate because it is still legal to sell unsafe toys and unsafe gas and electricity appliances in this country. We also need more legislation for car safety. Although I am pleased to see the activity and scope of function of the National Prices Commission, it is only a small beginning to the serious need for true consumer protection—not just protection against rising prices—in detailed description of the ingredients of what is being bought and of the dangers of what is being purchased.

I would like to comment on the September report of the National Prices Commission. In page 24 of that report there is reference to possible legislation. Under the heading "Law relating to Consumer Protection", it reads:

We are in process of commissioning an expert to make a comparative analysis of the Irish law relating to consumer protection. We expect that this study will be completed not later than March, 1973.

Once again, this body seems to be doing a great deal of work in areas where it would be expected that other bodies might be involved. If this report recommends legislation, I hope that it will be implemented with the necessary speed.

An Cathaoirleach

I am sure the Senator is aware that legislation may not be advocated on the Appropriation Act motion. While she is not actually advocating it, she is going rather close to the point.

Mrs. Robinson

I accept that. It is sometimes difficult to comment on the present administration without feeling the necessity to make recommendations. I will try to keep within the wide limits of what is in order on the Appropriation Act.

The Irish Land Commission have just brought in their report for the year 1970-1971. This was submitted just before Christmas 1972. This seems to be an incredible delay. In an effort to have a debate both on the content of that report and on the role of the Land Commission, Senator Kelly and I have tabled a motion on it. This is an appropriate point at which to end my contribution to the debate on the Appropriation Act. We should like to know when there is likely to be time given to discuss that motion. It is coming to the point where it does not seem worthwhile to try to involve the Seanad in discussion on important reports which are coming out because it is so difficult to get a debate on these matters.

Mr. McGowan

I should like to refer to a matter of some importance at present, which was discussed at some length last evening by Senator Kelly. Without taking on the role of the Minister in replying to him, I think the Senator's speech was mostly made up of questions addressed to Members on the other side. For that reason I should like to refer to what I consider to be the important role of politicians in the Republic at present. Judging from the remarks made by some Members here, it is a terrible pity that such remarks, however sincere and well-intentioned, are made without the required knowledge.

Senator Kelly expressed the hope that we will have a plebiscite on the Northern issue at the same time as the proposed plebiscite in Northern Ireland. I totally and utterly disagree with this proposal. It would be as big a farce as the proposed plebiscite in the North. It is time this was said. I am quite sure people realise that this plebiscite would serve no useful purpose. In fact, it would create more problems and result in confusing further the people of the North on our future intentions and hopes for the North.

Senator Kelly went on at length to criticise the Taoiseach's stand on this and what he said in America. No Irishman worthy of the name could express any other sentiments than those expressed by the Taoiseach. He said that we hoped to negotiate a peaceful settlement with the divided part of our country. That would include the minority and the majority. I cannot see what the objections are to that statement. It is clear-cut.

I am frequently in touch with people in the North, as I live beside them and I trade with them daily. Senator Kelly invited me to comment. I would ask politicians here to change their attitude. They must stop waving the flag and referring to the majority in the North of Ireland as Protestants. They may not have the same faith as ourselves but, nevertheless, their hopes and aspirations are for a united Ireland.

In recent times there have been big changes in their attitudes towards us. One of them has spoken recently and his outlook is worthy of our attention. That man is John Taylor. He is a very determined and a very strong man. Those of us who attribute his change of attitude to the unfortunate incident in which he was involved are making a mistake. John Taylor has been throwing out feelers to which politicians down here should listen. He has proposed that a nine-county Ulster be considered. I do not want to see that proposal dismissed. If John Taylor can go part of the way and say: "We should change the Border and include three more counties", I should like to say to him: "What is against including the other 23 counties? The people living in the other 23 counties have not got horns. If you think it is safe for the Six Counties to join with another three counties what is wrong with uniting the Six Counties with the Twenty-six Counties?". This is the sort of attitude and ground which must be explored by the people here who are really interested in a permanent solution.

I was saddened yesterday listening to Senator Kelly saying: "If I were an Orangeman the attitudes that I see in the South are the ones that would make me reach for my gun." Too many people have used the troubles in the North to strengthen their own political platform and have used them as a hardy annual when they have nothing better to offer. That kind of statement, from a Senator for whom I have the highest regard and who is a professor of law, is totally irresponsible and, I venture to say, more irresponsible than any statement made by hardy hacks in the North that we deplore so much. I was utterly disgusted to hear such a statement being made here. I would appeal to Senators to be careful in their statements because we should be aware that our listeners include 14 and 16 year olds who may attach more importance to such statements than we realise. Such statements should not be made in a House of Parliament by responsible people.

Senator Kelly also said it was ridiculous for the Taoiseach to say that he would not expect the people of the North to join with us in our present economic state. That is a fair and reasonable appraisal of our position and I see nothing wrong with it. The people of the North, regardless of whether they belong to the majority or the minority, are not fools. They realise that our State has only been in existence for 50 years and that we have not had massive subsidies from Britain. They also realise the importance of the link that they have had with Britain and they realise that the total economy has now been changed. They are looking to an improved standard of living in the Twenty-six Counties in the knowledge that our entry to the EEC will help us to develop and improve our standard of living. They know well that in future they will not have the same advantage.

Indeed, some people who talk about the better conditions and economic prosperity of the North know little or nothing about the situation. If one were to make a comparison between two counties such as Tyrone and Donegal, both of which I know very well, I would venture to say that County Donegal has more mileage of tarred road, a greater number of new houses, a greater number of new schools, a greater number of hospitals and in relation to the domestic life of the individual, County Donegal has a greater number of television sets, a greater number of cars than County Tyrone. I am proud to say that the whole structure and the standard of living in County Donegal are miles ahead of what it is in County Tyrone.

If any of those people who want to make statements on the economy of what we are asking the people in the North to join, they should investigate and give a fair comparison. Let them compare the city of Belfast with the city of Dublin and let them compare like with like.

I appreciate that we have serious discrepancies in social welfare. However, this may be an advantage. I never want to see the day that this country, North or South, will go overboard and make it more attractive not to work than to work. That would be very bad for the country, particularly in relation to our future in the EEC. If we want to hold our part as a nation in Europe we certainly want to encourage and provide incentives to work. Those who make cat-calls about our social welfare standards are out of touch with what the people in the North need. If they are only hoping to join a united Ireland that will give £25 a week dole to a man, where he will get only £20 a week to work, that is not the kind of united Ireland that the majority of the people in the North want. If there are people there who want that, they are in a minority.

I sincerely ask the people who are considering the Northern problems to equip themselves with more knowledge of Northern affairs. I would compare their lack of knowledge with the lack of knowledge of British politicians. After nearly 1,000 years of democracy in England, there are now people who are panicking to familiarise themselves with problems in Ireland. That is sad, but it reminds me of people here who are continuing to pontificate and have not the knowledge. What they are saying reads well but in practice they are out of touch. I would therefore appeal to them to see on the ground what would go further towards uniting a country.

I have great hope for the future of the North despite how dark it looks today. There are a big number of people there who realise they are a small part of the European Community at present. The total number of people on this island is about five million in a Community of around 250 million. The minority and the majority in the Six Counties will very soon realise this and will very soon wake up to take advantage of improved trading and industrial development of the whole country. I suggest that the Government and those who are interested in making a useful and helpful contribution to the people of Northern Ireland should work on those lines.

People should realise that men in public life, such as Bill Craig—whom we are almost frightened to see appearing in public urging certain lines of action—are like some of our own. They are using the situation to their political advantage and it is no less than a political bandwagon and has been a very successful bandwagon. Bill Craig has made very useful political propaganda to the point where he, on his own, has nearly destroyed the Unionist Party and is largely responsible for the destruction of the Unionist Government in Stormont.

I would urge more dialogue and communication, and we should make an effort to equip ourselves with better knowledge of the courses that we should be adopting in order to promote useful discussion and progress on the North. I hold out great hopes of the proposal that is being bandied around about a Council of Ireland. We will have to accept a regional administration or a parliament of some kind in Belfast or somewhere else in the North. There is a job to be done by some people who yet do not understand the benefits that they could gain from a united Ireland. As a start we should look towards accepting that we should be helpful in setting it up. A Council of Ireland, whether a weak assembly or a strong one, will form the basic framework of what will ultimately solve our problems.

I should like to refer to two other matters—the money that the Government provide for some of our public companies and how it is used, and if the public are getting full benefits; and the need to streamline administration and to attack bureaucracy and any kind of administration that is not prepared to reorganise itself. I should like to refer briefly to the Department of Social Welfare who have improved the lot of those in need, such as old age pensioners and the various headings under which social welfare payments are given.

I welcome the great advance made in the social welfare field. Unfortunately, down the line we are straddled with a Stone Age administration. We are straddled with a system where an investigation officer can enter a house and if he sees a woman knitting a cardigan he is likely to ask her: "How many of those would you knit in a year?" That is the type of system Departments should streamline, so as to bring the needed benefits to the people.

I should like to refer briefly to moneys provided for rural electrification. We have done a very fine job and have provided most of the homes in Ireland with electrification. This has been a great advance and will help to put in the basic framework for the development of our country. However, we could be more concerned about administration in this field. At present, the ESB are pursuing a policy which almost makes them dictators. In the village of Carrigans in County Donegal, the local authority are building a new housing scheme, quite near to the public supply. When the ESB were asked to connect the supply to the housing scheme they replied they would do so for a lump sum or, alternatively, if all the households installed immersion heaters.

I deplore this type of attitude. Furthermore, most of the Senators who are in contact with the public realise that people building new houses who have not previously had an electric supply are being asked to pay anything up to £1,000 for connection to the electricity supply. While the Government's intention is well-meaning, there should be more criticism of administration.

The same applies to the Land Commission. I agreed wholeheartedly with the Minister for Lands when nearly three years ago he called for the Land Commission to be abolished. Nobody regrets more the continuing existence of the Land Commission than I do. They are totally out of date in their approach to the needs of the country. It has cost the country, especially my county, a great loss of prosperity from lack of proper development of forestry. The approach to the problem is totally outdated by people who prefer to administer from the high stool of the office rather than getting out and getting the work done. We have vast tracts of land in the West of Ireland which could have been planted and which would have contributed largely to the improvement of our economy.

We are importing hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of timber. We know that the timber which we produce in Ireland is of equal quality with any we import from any part of the world. The Department of Lands have done a bad job in getting this idea across. They have not been progressive enough in the production of timber. The negative results which have followed from this slack administration have cost the economy hundreds of thousands of pounds. I do not apologise for saying that, if we had had a more active Department of Lands in the last 25 years, we would have a vastly improved economy. It is costing more money to send out the Department's inspectors to investigate an acre of land than it would cost to purchase that acre for forestry development.

At this late stage I hope the Government will put more pressure on the Department of Lands, that in the near future the Land Commission will be abolished and that the Department will attack the problem of administration generally. If we had that kind of approach we would not now be criticising the Department of Lands.

I will conclude by saying that no matter how much money we provide, if we do not streamline the system we will be wasting a great deal of money. Some years ago I asked the late Donogh O'Malley's Private Secretary how he, Donogh O'Malley, made progress in his educational policy—how did he overcome the views of the outdated people in his Department? The Private Secretary replied that anyone who was difficult was just plucked out of the way.

That is the only way the programme of administration will get through. If we are endeavouring to improve our part of Ireland, we should attack the sluggish administration at every level, whether it be a health board, local authority, the Land Commission or whichever Departments are slow to adopt the best principles of administration. We should use the opportunities provided to highlight every case where a Department are slow to act. I shall continue to do this from the smallest to the largest area of administration while I am in public office. We will waste time allocating large sums of money if we do not concern ourselves with the way in which they are being administered.

Mr. Russell

This debate on the Appropriation Act offers an opportunity, as you, Sir, said earlier, to speak on a variety of subjects covered by the various Votes. I should like to deal with only a few points. There is a temptation to range over quite a variety of subjects and the Senators who have spoken so far have availed of this opportunity to speak on various facets of the economic and social life of the country.

I do not propose to speak on the North. Most of the Senators who have spoken have mentioned the Northern problem. I feel it is a subject on which there have been too many diverse speeches in the South in the past three or four years. I have been a long time in public life and I regret to say that all of us in the South must or should feel a sense of shame for the neglect we have offered to the North over the years. Except for fighting speeches made outside chapel gates at general election meetings, very few constructive ideas came forward from any group, party or organisation here in the past 50 years. I am very sorry to have to say it, but that is the effect.

Senator Kelly's speech was criticised by Senator McGowan. He has a perfect right to do so. I am always interested to hear a Senator who lives close to the Six Counties speaking because he is obviously more in touch with life there than a person like me who lives more than a hundred miles away.

Senator Kelly has been consistent in his views. Most people, irrespective of their political associations, would agree that the unity we seek is one of hearts and minds and not just a geographical unity. What we want to find is a consensus among moderate-minded men, north and south of the Border, irrespective of their religious beliefs. This is the only way to achieve a lasting, just and permanent foundation for peace. That is our ambition. Politicians have an obligation to follow that ideal. The windy politicians who are merely seeking headlines in the newspapers would be better to keep their counsel to themselves.

In a slightly lighter vein, I should like to quote a little limerick I composed travelling up yesterday in my car. It was a very bad morning with a lot of fog on the road. Having a fairly active mind, I usually occupy myself in considering things which concern me, and sometimes the country too. I turned on the news because I was interested in what our delegates to the European Parliament had to say. The concluding statement saddened me greatly as I am sure it did other Senators, particularly those on the other side of the House—that the five delegates from the Fianna Fáil Party had not yet found a satisfactory resting place. Being a Limerickman, I composed this little limerick on the spur of the moment. The title I gave it is "Lament for Political Soul-Searchers" and I quote it for what it is worth:

They seek them here, they seek them there;

They seek their soulmates everywhere.

First it is left, then it is right—

Anxious days and sleepless nights—

To find the Fenians' destiny. But where?

I will give a signed copy of that to the Minister later.

Mr. Keery

It is odd that a Limerickman does not know the structure of a limerick.

Mr. Russell

Does the Senator?

Mr. Keery

That was not a limerick.

Mr. Russell

I think it is a rather good limerick.

Mr. McGlinchey

The limerick might have referred to the voters whom Fine Gael have been seeking for so many years and could not find.

Mr. Russell

I will move on. Obviously, my limerick is not appreciated.

An Cathaoirleach

The Chair is rather anxious. The construction, the format of limericks is hardly a subject for discussion on the motion. Senator Russell to continue on the motion.

Mr. Russell

Since the Appropriation Act was passed just prior to Christmas this country has joined the European Economic Community. We can say truthfully that any discussion which we have on the Act now is to a large extent outdated by the events which have occurred since we became members of the EEC. This is a historic occasion because it will be the last time that we as an Irish Parliament will be discussing an Appropriation Act having full command of our sovereign rights. In the referendum the Irish people decided by an overwhelming majority that they were prepared to secede a substantial part of their sovereign rights in the interests of the European Community. They were prepared to join the other eight member countries of the EEC to work together for peace, prosperity and for the economic and social betterment of all the peoples. We made that historic decision. It was the right decision. We, therefore, must accept the fact that henceforth many of the decisions which will affect the future of this country will be made outside our shores.

During the referendum campaign, capital was made of the argument that we were selling away our sovereign rights which we had fought for so hard during many generations. A huge majority of the Irish people decided that as Europeans they wanted to join with their fellow nations in Europe in the interests of all our peoples. I do not know the form next year's Appropriation Bill will take. Possibly the form will be the same, but the circumstances can never be the same. We all hope that our decision will prove in the ensuing 12 months that the action taken a few weeks ago was the right one.

I am concerned at the effort being made now among the representatives of several nations, including our own, to give more teeth to the European Parliament. It was suggested that it would become a more democratic assembly if there were direct elections to the European Parliament. In theory, that is right. Obviously, government by the people means government by direct election of the people in universal franchise. That is the accepted basis for democracy. If you have direct elections by the people to any assembly, whether it be a town commission or a European Parliament, it can then be described as a democratic assembly. The decisions made there by a majority must be binding on all the people concerned.

What worries me is that if direct elections to the European Parliament come about, will it mean a lessening of the importance of the national parliaments, including our own, or will it mean that the power of the Commission will be lessened and that the democratically elected European Parliament will have greater powers? If it means that, I am in favour of it. One of the weaknesses of the present institutions is that the Commissioners have too much power and the European Parliament have too little. The European Parliament have been held up to be merely a talking shop. All they can do is to rubber stamp decisions already made by the Commission.

If it means a lessening of the powers of the national parliaments, I would be against it. Our representatives should be very slow to agree to any change, however desirable, if it will mean a lessening of the powers of the national parliaments.

Last year could be described as a mixed year. There have been a number of favourable indications that the country was pulling out of the trough into which it had fallen in the previous two years. Some indications were the improvement in the balance of payments situation brought about by improved terms of trade; an increase, though a modest one, in the gross national product; an increase in volume in industrial production by about 5 per cent and, most important, an increase in industrial exports of 21 per cent in money terms but somewhat less in volume.

A most encouraging feature was the substantial increase in industrial exports to EEC countries which amounted to some 90 per cent. Of course, percentages can be misleading. If we export one pound's worth to Europe and this is increased to two pound's worth, it is nice to put it down in an official document as an increase of 100 per cent. It is important to look at the base but the trend is in the right direction and if we can maintain that trend as members of the EEC it will mean great things for this country particularly in regard to industrial employment.

Our efforts must go towards selling more agriculturally processed goods and industrial goods in the Common Market. Our exports efforts were assisted by the virtual devaluation of the floating £. Even having regard to that it was a worthwhile effort during 1972 and our industrialists and those in charge of meat processing and other industries are to be congratulated on their efforts.

On the unfavourable side we still have the troubles in the North which undoubtedly have affected the tourist industry and have discouraged investment not only in the North but in the whole country. People in the USA and in Europe look at Ireland as one small island and the wide publicity given to the problems in the North has affected the island as a whole.

In the final analysis, employment is one of the indications of a country's well-being or otherwise. Unemployment has continued at a very high rate. At the turn of the year there were almost 76,000 unemployed. That is a sad state of affairs considering the enormous investment which has gone into industrial enterprises during recent years. The net increase in industrial employment during the past four years has been only 2,000 and that is likely to fall during the current year. We may find at the end of this year that after four years of endeavour and heavy industrial investment our employment situation in manufacturing industry has remained the same for the last four years.

While industrial investment has been high it has shown a tendency to decline in recent months. This, no doubt, has been brought about by the troubles in the North which have dissuaded investment.

There has been continuing severe inflation during the past few years which is higher than most, if not all, the other countries in western Europe. This is the factor most likely to inhibit our efforts to increase industrial employment. If we cannot maintain inflation at a lower level than that in Europe and the UK we will not be able to export to these countries.

We will also be in a serious situation in the home market. If our small market is thrown open to imports from the UK and continental firms we will be in a serious situation if we cannot even maintain our home market. Inflation is not just a textbook subject to be spoken about in seminars; it is a serious fact of life that effects everybody. Unfortunately, the lower we go in the scale the more its effects are felt. The man down the line will suffer most. One of the primary efforts of the EEC must be to tackle inflation. It can be tackled to a limited extent by individual countries but can only successfully be overcome by joint effort of all EEC countries.

As the Minister for Finance has stated on a number of occasions, if the countries of the EEC cannot control inflation it will destroy us. Inflation can destroy and unfortunately it destroys the weakest first.

If, on the other hand, we control inflation and keep our costs within reasonable bounds I am very optimistic for the future of this country. There are certain markets in which we cannot hope to compete where mass-produced goods are turned out by giant industries. We have neither the necessary capital nor the technical know-how nor have we a large enough home market as a firm basis for that type of industry.

There are more specialised types of industries for which our industrial setup is particularly suited. Then we have perhaps our greatest advantage of all— our agricultural industry. Every effort should be made in Ireland to process the raw materials coming from the land whether they be in the form of livestock or vegetables and to export them in the finished state. If we are competitive in these spheres, this country will profit greatly from membership of the EEC.

Because of the huge increase that has taken place in the price of most agricultural products and produce over the last year it would be wrong to assume that that increase would continue forever. There was a big gap between EEC prices and the prices in Ireland for food and livestock. We were hamstrung by the fact that for generations we were exporting through a subsidised British market. We were exporting to the UK at a loss. In fact, the Irish taxpayer was paying the British consumer to eat Irish products at less than world market prices. That situation has now been put to one side and the result is that there is a big increase in the price of some food. This situation will level off. It encourages our farmers and industrialists to become as efficient as possible in order to sell in EEC at profitable prices.

One worthwhile development took place during the past year. That was the Employer-Labour Conference agreement. It did not solve the problem of inflation but we can say that, if that agreement had not come about, inflation would have been far greater in this country over the last 18 months. That conference gives great promise of joint action between the employers, employees and the State to work jointly together in the interests of the country to control inflation, if at all possible by voluntary means. The statutory controls are only a last resort when everything else fails. Other countries have found it necessary to impose statutory controls but everybody would prefer to see inflation being controlled by the employers, employees and the State coming together and deciding on a programme that would damp down the rate of inflation in this country.

To get the worker to accept that situation he must be told what he is going to get out of it. He is entitled to see what share of the national cake he is going to get. You cannot expect a worker to agree to cut down on the rate of increase in wages unless he sees that at the end of a certain period it is going to be better for himself, his family and his job. There is a tremendous public relations job to be done in that field. The worker feels envious when he sees the boss driving around in a £6,000 car when, at the same time, he is being asked to hold his wage increases to some agreed formula. There must be justice on both sides and it must be seen to be done. The ordinary man in the street cannot believe that sacrifice is being equally borne if on one side he sees extravagant wealth. We have it in this country. On the other side there are men working for £20, £25 or £30 per week, but they have wives and children to support, they also have high taxes and rates and now they have high food prices to cope with. This problem must be faced jointly, so that everybody will be assured that the efforts and rewards will be shared until inflation is overcome.

There has been talk recently of the carcase meat industry. I am not a farmer so I do not wish to take sides on that issue. However, the producer is entitled to get the best price for his product. Obviously, he will fight hard against any question of control or any question of a combination of circumstances that would prohibit him from getting the best price possible for his livestock.

If we could slaughter all our cattle here and export the meat to the Continent, the UK or elsewhere in the form of chilled beef the advantages in increased employment would be tremendous. It was stated on a television programme recently that employment in that industry, which is about 4,000 now, could be trebled if all livestock were killed at home. In the short term this may not be practical; in fact, it could well be undesirable. If we are going to reach the ideal and slaughter and process at home, and to use the ancillary by-products at home, it must be done over a period of years. The traditional cattle trade in this country could not be phased out overnight. It would be undesirable to phase it out suddenly. Until we reach a time when the meat factories can offer as good a price to the farmer as the exporters, the present system should stand.

It is a pity that the meat factories come under the aegis of the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries. They are an industry and it might lead to an improvement if they were to come under the aegis of the Minister for Industry and Commerce. If they had the same opportunities and the same advisory bodies as industry, it should be possible for them to put their industry in a very efficient state so that they could offer the farmer as good a price for cattle for slaughter as he now gets for exports of cattle on the hoof.

The time is opportune for a study in depth of the cattle industry to enable us to assess the advantages that would accrue to the country if cattle could be slaughtered at home and, from the farmer's side, what the changes would mean to him. Nobody wants to see a monopoly of any kind in this industry. It would be most undesirable if the farmer could not enjoy a competitive position that would ensure him of the best price for his livestock. It is urgent that some national policy should be decided on very soon. In recent months there have been a large number of redundancies in our meat factories. This is a particularly sad state of affairs because a number of those meat plants are situated in rural areas which can least afford to have unemployment. It is vital that the Government tackle the situation very quickly and produce a national policy so that the proprietors of meat factories, the workers and the farming community will know where they stand.

I should like to mention the question of industrial development with specific reference to small industries. I sometimes wonder if our stated policy on industrial development is the right one. I agree that the type of industries which offer the best hopes of employment are industries with established export markets. They have a lot to offer and have the necessary technical personnel. Industries of that type have played a very significant part in providing increased employment over the years. No organisation has done more than the Shannon Free Airport Development Company which has provided an example for other industrial estates around the country. This type of development is highly desirable. They are the type of industries that offer quick success because they have an established market, technical know-how and the required capital.

It is often forgotten that we have a huge number of small industries that employ less than 100 people. Perhaps that figure might be a little high in speaking of small industries in this country but it is the figure generally taken in outside countries. Over 90 per cent of our industries employ less than 100 people and they are responsible for approximately 40 per cent of the total number employed in industry. In other words, they are a very significant section of industrial employment and should get every possible encouragement from the Government and semi-State sources to continue in business. Many of those industries have been established for many years—they were probably established by one man, and were passed on to his son and grandson down through the years—and have continued in business under very difficult circumstances. Their roots are in the soil. They are not likely to put the key in the door and close up if things get bad. They have become used to trading under difficult conditions over the years. They are the type of industries we should encourage to stay and to flourish in this country.

While a good deal has been done for them, particularly by the small industries section of the IDA, I think a lot more could be done to help them through difficult periods which occur in every industry from time to time. I would like to see a special section set up in the Department of Industry and Commerce to keep in close touch with groups of small industries. I should like to see such industries getting advice not only on how to reorganise their business but advice on possible product changes in their factories. One must remember that the majority of those industries cannot afford to employ fulltime accountants and it may be possible to supply some accountancy service to them.

They should also be made more aware of the existing semi-State enterprises which were established to assist industry. I am thinking of institutions like the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards, the IDA and other organisations which have been set up in recent years and which have undertaken a lot of good work already. Many small industries do not know how to go about getting help from those institutions. Much of the time of the office staffs of small industries is taken up with filling in forms for such things as PAYE, VAT, income tax and statistical returns. We public representatives receive them in their finished form but they are the result of much unpaid work on the part of small industries. Some way could be found to assist the small industrialist to deal with those numerous forms which have increased so much in recent years and, unfortunately, will continue to increase in the years ahead.

The Government have a serious obligation, in the present free trade situation, to help the small, long-established Irish industries to survive in the very difficult and competitive times ahead. The best contribution that the Government, and especially the Minister for Finance, could make to assist any industry, large or small, would be a significant reduction in taxation. The Minister has corrected the appalling error he made a couple of years ago when he increased effective taxation on industry to 58 per cent. It has now been put back to 50 per cent and the result of that sensible step can be seen in the increased investment which industry is making in new plant and new buildings.

Contrary to what some of the know-alls, who have no experience of industry, have been saying from time to time, if taxation is reduced it will not be frittered away in high living by the owners or the directors of the industries. The major portion of it has been ploughed back into industry again. The best judge of how to improve his industry is the business man himself. There may be some directors or businessmen who pay out too much in dividends or who otherwise do not conserve their liquid resources, but these gentlemen do not stay in business too long. Some Senators will agree that business is a hard school. In business it is a case of the survival of the fittest.

I should like to refer to another matter that is being referred to a lot at present. I was glad to see it was emphasised recently by our new Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Brian Lenihan. I am speaking about the question of regional policy. Regional policy and monetary union go hand-in-hand. Monetary union has not made hopeful progress among the nine EEC countries, but if a regional policy fund were to be set up during the current year and if decisions were made much sooner than we think as to how that fund will be spent, it would be a matter for the individual countries to decide their own regional policy.

Have we got a regional policy? I know we have regional development organisations. There has been a lot of talk about regional development. I cannot think of the numbers of "Save the West" campaigns we have had over the years, or of the various organisations set up to assist in stopping emigration from the west. I am not aware of any overall, national regional policy that is ready and tailor-made to take advantage of any funds that may be coming from any EEC fund set up for this purpose. The time has come when we should seriously consider putting the regional development organisations on a statutory basis.

I am a member of the Mid-Western, or Limerick-Clare-North Tipperary, Regional Development Organisation. It has worked exceedingly well from the very first day it was established. I think it was the first—if not the second —RDO established. All the various interests concerned—the local authorities, harbour boards, tourist organisations, representatives from industry and commerce, and so on—worked together in a regional team. From the word "go" there has been no conflict of interests. It has been quite remarkable how representatives from various counties and areas, some of them representing very small statutory bodies, came together from the first day realising that their local area was going to benefit, if the area as a whole benefited.

Serious consideration should be given to putting these regional organisations on a statutory basis. At the moment they are purely discussion groups. In the RDO of which I am a member there is no such thing as a vote: there is either a unanimous decision or the proposal goes by the board. So far, this has worked out, but I do not think it would work out inevitably. The normal democratic process demands that you have a vote now and then, and the majority vote decides the issue. Much could be done through these bodies if power is devolved from the central bodies to the regional organisations. If there is a devolution of power downwards—not power taken away from the smaller authorities—I could see these regional development organisations playing a significant part in the context of the Common Market. They have a vital part to play.

In addition, we shall possibly have to consider the question of elections to these organisations. They are elected indirectly at the moment, but the question of direct election must arise. They have a very important part to play. I am speaking with some experience and with an amount of encouragement from my own membership of the Mid-Western RDO. I know that in other areas things have not gone so well. One of the reasons may have been that they are not statutory bodies and that they are just regarded as talking shops with no power beyond the power to advise. Perhaps if they were put on a statutory basis and given teeth by being granted powers from the top down, they could prove effective means of development in local areas.

While speaking on this facet of local government, I should like to repeat what I have already mentioned in this House and elsewhere on one or two occasions. The policy outlined in the White Paper issued by the Minister for Local Government which appeared almost two years ago would be disastrous if put into effect. To contemplate the wholesale abolition of small local authorities is a step in the wrong direction. The point has been made—and there is some sense in it—that a number of these small bodies are little better than talking shops. Perhaps they are, but who would say that the Seanad itself is not a talking shop at times, or the Dáil, or, indeed, some of the county councils and city councils? The small urban councils or town commissions cannot be condemned on those grounds.

With all due respects to the Minister, who is young and active and who I believe is ambitious to get on in his job and to do the best for the country in his particular Ministry, I consider he is approaching this from the wrong end. He should not be asking himself: "How many of these small authorities can we abolish and give the county councils or city councils more power"? He should be asking: "How many of them can we retain and give them a useful function in local government, no matter how small it may be"? Whatever way they see it, the best antidote against the continuing, creeping bureaucratic control of this country, and every other country, is the small statutory body composed of men elected directly by people living in their own areas. They represent the grassroots. They may be criticised at times and they may be sneered at by some of the know-alls who never did anything for anybody, and who never tested their popularity with the electorate.

Speaking as one who has been in local government for a long time, I can say that I have the greatest regard and respect for the little council and for the little man who gets there the hard way by going around and looking for votes. He knows what the people at the grassroots want. If you do away with community councils, parish councils, associations and organisations of one kind or another which are all good in their own way, there is no substitute for the statutory body with the freely-elected public representative as a member. It would be a tremendous disservice to the country and to local government generally if the Minister sweeps away all these small bodies.

I am not saying that they should all be retained. Obviously, over the years some of them have ceased to have a reason for living, to put it very crudely and bluntly. On the other hand, urban centres have grown up and expanded where there should be small local authorities and they are not represented at all. There are some town commissioners in places which have far bigger urban centres than, say, urban councils. There are anomalies such as these that have grown up over the years. I submit they should be rectified. There should, however, not be wholesale slaughter across the board of small local authorities; it would be a disastrous step. It would be completely contrary to the set-up of local authorities on the Continent. We have far less local authorities, relatively, than most European countries, such as France and Germany and, indeed, the United States. We ought to learn from these countries where democracy has survived in spite of stresses or strains over hundreds of years.

When we are talking about Europe we should not be concerned only with the social and economic side, both of which are very important, but also with another aspect which everybody would agree on and that is the quality of life —the type of life we will live in the new Europe. Obviously, a man's wellbeing has a great bearing on the type of life he leads. A good job, good wages and good social services are important to a man. Above that, there is the quality of life. A family must know the type of world they are growing up in so that they can reach beyond the material to the spiritual things of life such as tradition, culture, history, paintings, music and ecology. All these factors must be taken into consideration. I hope our representatives in the European Communities will keep these factors before their minds. We have much to gain from Europe, but we also have much to offer. We may be a small country but we are not lacking in ideals or traditions. We should remember that we have thousands of years of history behind us. I hope the ideas of gaining from and contributing to Europe will go hand-in-hand.

Ruairí Brugha

Cuireann sé andhíomá orm gur gá dhom arís i mbliana cur síos ar chursaí an Tuaiscirt ar an Acht Leithreasa seo. Ach is dóigh liom gurb é an gné is tabhachtaí dár saol é faoi lathair agus go raibh sé amhlaidh le blianta beaga anuas.

I am dismayed to find it necessary to address my remarks on the Appropriation Act this year again to the Northern situation. It is still the most important aspect of our affairs at the present time as it has been for some years past. Since we last discussed this Act, some notable changes have taken place on the national scene. In March of last year the British Government suspended the Stormont Parliament. One would have hoped that following that suspension some air of sanity and common sense might have been introduced into the Irish scene.

I had hoped that the Unionists of Northern Ireland, having been deprived of the power to which they had been accustomed for over 50 years, would then have had an opportunity to take a fresh look at their situation in Ireland and, perhaps, to rationalise their position. However, various violent elements in the community in the North, whether it was the violence of the British military, of sectarianism on either side or the violence of extreme Unionism or Republicanism, ensured that no breathing space would be given to anyone in the Northern community to examine the situation in Ireland in the 1970s.

The next significant event in relation to our national position which took place was the very clear decision by the Irish electorate that this State would become a member of the European Communities. This has particular significance in the long term for the whole island. Apart from the long term ideal of political development and unity in Europe, the economic consequences of membership of the Communities, so far as the entire population of this island is concerned must have great significance. It must be perfectly obvious to anyone living in Northern Ireland that the economic interests of both parts of this country will inevitably tend to merge. In that sense our membership of the EEC must have considerable significance for all thinking elements in the North of Ireland.

The other event which took place since January of last year, and which should have some significance in the Northern Ireland context, was the recent referendum dealing with the controversial section of Article 44 of the Constitution. The referendum was held on the subsections of the article because the existence of these subsections had been used not alone to influence and bias a part of the Northern community but also overseas to make our present Constitution appear to be sectarian. The very clear decision by the electorate here to delete these sections should help to some extent to remove unfair accusations of sectarianism within our constitutional structure.

To turn to the present situation in relation to the North, I should like to say that one of the ingredients which is lacking in the Northern situation is a simple declaration by Britain of her interest in Irish affairs. That is not to suggest that she should declare her intention of withdrawing her military and other forces overnight in order to get out of an impossible and embarrassing situation, but rather quite simply what Britain herself really wants in the context of the 1970s and the future. Does she want for all time to be in the position where people in the North of Ireland will continue to protest their own particular brand of loyalty to the British Crown when it suits them and they think it is to their benefit, and to claim a part of Ireland as a part of the United Kingdom? It would be a contribution to the situation if Britain, in the context of the 1970s and of her new position in Europe, would indicate whether she wants to be permanently involved in Irish affairs as she is at present. If this is what Britain wants she ought to indicate it. Most of us, and no doubt the majority of the British public, believe that it can no longer serve Britain or her people to continue with an uneasy, uncomfortable, and potentially disastrous involvement in Ireland.

I suggest that there must be many hundreds of thousands of Protestants in the North who would also welcome a clear, forthright statement from Britain that could set the stage for a meeting of minds between all of us who live in Ireland. We have always maintained that responsibility for Irish affairs should be held by Irish elected representatives without the help or hindrance of any other country.

I am sure Northern Unionists understand that the whole aim of national policy during this century has been to create a situation where decisions about Ireland will be taken in Ireland by those who live here and not by any other country or people. I am quite sure that in normal circumstances our outlook in this regard is shared by many Unionists, including extreme Unionists. It is becoming quite clear, listening to some of the spokesmen of Unionism, that their belief in their right to independence is a far stronger influence with them than any supposed loyalty to any other form of overseas government. If it were not for the situation which was created in the North in which two opposing sections of the community were put together, and if it were not for the traditional attitude of antagonism towards us on the part of the Unionists in the North, the problems of Ireland could have been solved long ago.

If we are to find fault with the present situation, apart from British responsibility in it, I believe we should point to the errors on both sides. Those on the Nationalist side who encourage young people to believe that the human division in Ireland can be solved by guns and bombs carry great responsibility. Their responsibility is greater than that of the young people who participate in violence in the North because they are living in a situation in which they are exposed to violence.

An even greater responsibility rests on those on the Unionist side in the North who encourage their followers to believe that their existence in Ireland needs to be defended by stockpiling weapons which can be used to exterminate their neighbours. In this connection a major obstacle to any possibility of bringing about a negotiated settlement, even for an interim period, is that so far Britain has failed to deal with the problem of unknown numbers of armed so-called loyalist militants who frequently threaten to resort to arms. There is also the fact that certain Unionist politicians have used the existence of private armies supporting them as a threat to the minority and as a threat to Britain in case she might want a change of policy.

It is now clear that if the area called Northern Ireland were in the long-term to be governed directly from London there would be a significant section of the population which would remain opposed to that form of administration. It is also clear that if at the present time the government of the country were centred in Dublin another significant section of the population of that area would not be prepared to give allegiance to such an administration. No sensible person, not even a Unionist, will deny that the area known as Northern Ireland is unstable. This is because the original concept, to which I referred last year, of locking up in the six north-eastern counties a large section of people of normal Irish allegiance with a larger section of people of a mixed and confused allegiance was, in itself, a situation which was unnatural and almost bound to become unstable. What we have seen over recent years is that the dominant group within that area has proved itself unable to provide government. We should, however, acknowledge that the original concept was wrong.

It is difficult to blame those who have failed to make a situation which was potentially unworkable work.

In the same sense and learning from the mistakes of the past, we must have the maturity to appreciate that if the situation in Northern Ireland is inherently unstable any similar set-up which would try to contain within it, in an all-Ireland context, many hundreds of thousands of people who at present would be opposed to that, would also be unstable. I believe the right approach at present is to be prepared to consider any proposals for an interim arrangement for the North from the point of view of whether such proposals can bring peace to ordinary people and at the same time leave room for reconciliation and progress towards a coming together of people in Ireland.

It would be foolish, on the other hand, for anyone to think that any such arrangement could easily be brought about with the agreement of either extreme elements. Any of the extreme elements involved in the Northern Ireland situation such as the UVF, UDA or either wing of the IRA can prevent progress in this direction if they are determined to do so.

Regarding a plebiscite which has been proposed for Northern Ireland I should like to refer briefly to the reference in a daily newspaper of today's date which states:

British troops in Derry's Bogside have been carrying out their own Border plebiscite poll among local residents during the past two weeks, asking them: "Do you want to remain under British rule or be ruled by Jack Lynch?"

The report goes on to say—

Many of those canvassed were understandably afraid that if they said they would vote for a united Ireland, they would be subjected to retaliatory pressure such as army raids, having members of their family picked up or even attacks by the UDA.

If that report is correct it is an indication of futility on the part of the British authorities if they are encouraging soldiers to carry out a market research programme in any part of the North. Soldiers are not qualified for this type of work nor, indeed, are they qualified in the long term to police any area.

I have argued against a plebiscite of this nature over the years since it was first suggested by a British Commission over three years ago. It can serve no useful purpose other than to confirm the numerical situation within the 6-county area, vis-a-vis the whole of Ireland. This decision to hold a plebiscite was taken hastily when the Stormont Parliament was being suspended in order to quieten the fears of extreme Unionists. Its main object can only be to placate extremists whose fears prevent them from considering ordinary democracy. Its main defect would be to increase polarisation between the two communities in the North and encourage extreme Protestants into believing that they may continue to dominate their Catholic neighbours. If the questions being put, instead of being bald and brutal as they are proposed to be, were to put reasonable interim alternatives to the people of the Six Counties they might serve some useful purpose. That is not what is being done.

The suggestion of holding a plebiscite in the Republic on the same day is one which should be approached with very great care. While it might be a satisfactory exercise in democracy it would be futile in the sense that, like the proposed plebiscite by Britain, it would merely confirm what people already know—that we want to see unity by peaceful means.

There would be one disadvantage of some significance. If a plebiscite were to be held here on the same question as the British propose to put to the Northern people, the result would further polarise the Protestant community which has already been even more isolated from the remainder of the community in recent times by brutal violence which Protestants see as directed against themselves.

However we are engaged in the practice of politics and Britain, by holding such a plebiscite in the North, is playing politics with the lives of people simply because she has been unable, due to past commitments, to find a way out of the confusion her history has caused in this country. In these circumstances the proposed British plebiscite, if it were allowed by us to go by default, would inevitably be used by the British media as a great victory for so-called democracy in Northern Ireland. It may, therefore, be wise to consider holding a more positive and constructive kind of plebiscite which might help not to divide but rather to bring together the different sections of our people.

There exists a state of mind among extreme Unionists in the North, and, indeed, among even some national elements in the Six Counties, of which many people in the Republic are I believe somewhat ignorant. It is a reaction complex and can best be illustrated by the following example. On one of the many occasions on which I have visited the North since September, 1969, I was told privately that many Unionists were pleased with the Taoiseach's television address in August, 1969, but that his later speech in Tralee in September, 1969, worried them because it was reasonable. They did not want southern spokesmen to sound reasonable. In the past few years I have come across many examples of this attitude of mind and it can be seen from the tendency of Northern newspapers to play down reasonable and rational things that have been said by spokesmen down here and to highlight inflammatory statements.

Both sections of the Northern community ought to realise that there is the possibility that the present British Government and the British people may despair of the whole situation. Unionists ought to have regard for the consequences to themselves from both extreme elements if Britain decided to cut her losses. We have only to look at the history of agreements and promises across the world to realise that in democracy promises of the past which the electorate of any country are not prepared to uphold cannot always be kept by Governments. Unionists should note that the British Government have recently been at pains to establish Britain's sovereignty over the Six Counties and have made it clear that they regard it as the right of the British Parliament to determine the future of Northern Ireland.

Looking at this situation in 1973 it seems to me that some of the alternatives that may be under consideration, apart from any proposals that the British Government may put into the White Paper, ought to be looked at and considered by the Northern community as a whole. The situation in which we live is that the only power which has possession so far as the Six Counties are concerned is Britain and Britain claims the right to deal with the situation as she thinks fit.

One alternative that might be adopted by Britain is to withdraw from the North completely. Nobody can say that this might not happen because in a democracy such as Britain is in a living democracy, it is what the public want at times, such as a general election, that politicians tend to give. Public opinion polls in Britain have proved that the British people are sick and tired of the Northern situation. Another alternative might be to ask the Republic to share in the administration of the Six Counties as has been proposed in the North by one of the political parties. A third alternative could be the separation of the two communities in the North. This is not as impossible as one might think. If the situation is such that two extreme elements continue to be at war with each other and lives continue to be lost it seems possible that in such a situation a drastic alternative of this kind might be contemplated. From Britain's point of view it would have the advantage of separating elements which are apparently totally irreconcilable. There would of course be objections to this from the Republic.

During the week there was a contribution in one of our newspapers by Mr. Donal Barrington on the question of possible future structures of the Council of Ireland.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I should like to remind the Senator that the debate is concerned with matters of administration for which members of the Government have responsibility and while there are areas in regard to the Northern Ireland situation for which members of the Government have responsibility it is going beyond the scope of this debate to discuss the Northern situation in a general fashion or to discuss what might be done in the future by various parties.

Ruairí Brugha

It has already been discussed to some extent. I do not want to go against the Chair. This situation is affecting our administration in many ways. It is the direct responsibility of the head of the Government. It is taking up a good deal of time and costing us a lot of money to provide security because of the situation and it has a direct influence on our future administration and development. In that sense——

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

It is present administration rather than future administration that we are largely concerned with. My concern was with the detail in which the Senator was referring to these things and the length of time he has dwelt on this without tying it specifically to the administration which we are discussing. I have not ruled the Senator out of order, I have asked him to recollect that that was the scope of the debate.

Ruairí Brugha

I prefaced my remarks by saying that I regretted having found it necessary to devote my remarks to this situation. Even if it is not possible for this House or for people like myself to resolve the situation, we should certainly show a measure of concern about it. I would recommend the current articles in one of our newspapers by Mr. Donal Barrington as a contribution to discussion and dialogue because it is only on some sort of consensus that we can bring matters to a stage where progress, which has been prevented in many areas the situation, can be brought about.

It is fairly obvious that the entire Northern situation could be resolved if the respective political parties were willing to come together to bring about a reasonable and acceptable solution. Furthermore, I believe this could be done without the help of Britain. I should like to conclude by saying that we all know that disputes of all kinds have to end at the conference table. Every one knows that in the complex Northern situation there can be no victory for violence. Honourable compromise is the only alternative to continued destruction and slaughter. Those on any side who engage in violence to achieve their aims, and especially those who encourage and support violence from a distance, should realise that the happenings in the North cannot be justified on any idealistic or patriotic grounds. To approve of violence on behalf of any cause, when there is a reasonable alternative, is to support violence for its own sake, and that is wrong. Two elements in Irish society —extreme Unionism and extreme Re-publicanism—are doing that. The people of the North of Ireland have the right to life and to freedom from fear. They are being denied that right at the present time by those two elements who have no mandate from anyone for their actions.

I hope when the Appropriation Bill comes up for consideration next year I will not find it necessary to devote my time to this subject.

Senator W. O'Brien rose.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

It is now a few minutes before the normal time for adjournment of the House for lunch. The Senator might prefer to wait until we resume at 2.15 p.m.

Business suspended at 12.55 p.m. and resumed at 2.15 p.m.

Mr. W. O'Brien

As other Senators have pointed out, this is an opportunity for us to examine how the Exchequer purse is being utilised and to consider if it is being utilised efficiently.

I have one particular point which I should like to mention and that is in connection with the Garda Síochána. At present there is a certain amount of disquiet regarding the inadequacy of the Garda in rural areas. I understand this is due to the fact that a number of gardaí are serving in Border towns. Nevertheless, the men who remain at home are over worked because of the inadequacy of the Garda strength and the people, in general, are the victims. The shortage in the Garda often leads to a sort of brazenness among the younger generation. They tend to get bolder and bolder if they are not checked in time and after a number of years they may become little criminals. For that reason some effort should be made to ensure that all counties and towns are properly catered for.

In addition, we must take into consideration the traffic havoc which causes so many accidents. The appearance of a garda in uniform will deter the man who is prepared to put down the boot or the man who takes the extra drink. It has often been said by the older generation that the man on the beat in a rural town or in a city was invaluable.

Much has been said regarding the social services. This morning a Senator spoke about the danger of having a steep increase in social welfare payments which might have the effect of encouraging people not to work. I do not agree with that. I have the utmost confidence in Irish men and Irish women. There will always be those who will not work, and there are people in the Dáil and in the Seanad who will do as little as they can. At the moment it is difficult to live because of the rising cost of living. I am not going to propose increases in social welfare payments because I know that would be out of order, but I should like to point out that in the Republic our present social welfare payments would not act as an incentive to any worker to remain at home and not work. The price of food, particularly meat, has put it far beyond the reach of the man living on social welfare payments. Because of that I hope that in the near future the Minister will be able to increase payments.

I should like to pay tribute to the IDA who are doing a very fine job. However, sometimes I consider the distribution of industries is confined too much to the cities. The location is very important and, if possible, consideration should be given to the rural population when siting industries. A number of people are forced to travel a long distance to work. Not alone is it a hardship on those who have to travel but it adds further to road hazards and increased traffic. I hope that industries will be spread more evenly throughout rural Ireland. I know there is a necessity to help as far as possible the existing Irish firms who find it difficult to survive at the moment. They are people who served us when we needed them badly and we were very anxious to have those small firms.

As regards tourism, I hope that this year will be better than the past few years. I hope that the troubles, North or South, will not prevent people coming to the country. Some years ago we lost very valuable tourist traffic not because of trouble in the North but in the South. Now that we are part of the European Community we should create a better image and standard so that other people will know we are capable of rising to the occasion.

Unemployment at present is a problem. Many public representatives are being approached by school-leavers who are looking for employment but there is very little employment available to them at present. If any Senator knows of vacancies I have many names to submit. I live in an area which is 16 miles from Shannon Airport and seven miles from Limerick city. In spite of its proximity to these two centres of employment young people are without jobs. For the past 12 months a large number of girls have been applying to the nursing profession in England. Recently I received a letter from a lady in a hospital in England who had quite a number a inquiries about such positions. She found it difficult to believe that we had no places available. This is exactly the situation which existed in the Regional Hospital in Limerick. Last February we had 40 vacancies in the Regional Hospital and there were 450 applications. That information is not new. All public representatives are confronted with the same situation. I do not have the solution but I should like to remind the House that if the present trends continue, our employment figure will be very high in two years' time.

The farmers at present appear to be enjoying a boom in the price of cattle. I listened carefully to Senator Crinion when he forecast that there would be 10,000,000 cattle in the country in a few years' time. The idea occurred to me that James Dillon would have enjoyed hearing a Senator from that side of the House speak with anxiety about the cattle situation. It is a good conversion and I welcome it even though it may be late. I remember the time when people were encouraged to slaughter calves. It was good that a certain amount of insanity prevailed. Despite the fact the advice was not heeded, it was pointed out then that cattle would contribute greatly to our economy. How true was that advice.

Reference has been made to the Land Commission. Somebody suggested they should be taken over by the Government but I do not agree with that suggestion. The Land Commission are a wonderful organisation. They take a stand and they are not influenced by political parties. Maybe they are being criticised because they are no longer a political football. The day has gone when a man would say that a farm had been divided in a political cumann. As long as they continue the present trend they are doing a good job.

In passing, I should also like to pay tribute to the ACC. They are giving farmers who are anxious to work but do not have an economic holding an opportunity to buy land so that they can play their part in Europe.

As regards the ESB, it has been said they are acting as dictators and I agree with that comment. I have had the same experience as Senator McGowan in regard to the sum of money which had to be paid before the service is supplied. It has gone beyond the capacity of young couples to pay this amount because they have many other financial commitments. The ESB do not take into consideration when erecting pylons and poles how they may devalue a farm by placing two or three poles in a field. I should like this suggestion to be noted—the poles should be placed where they will do least harm to the view and value of a farm.

I wish to make a passing reference to the North. If we are to encourage the people of the North to play their part in our community, not alone must we say we are impartial but we must be seen to be impartial. Our first duty must be to form an impartial tribunal when we are revising our Constitution. How can we be critical of Northern administration when in the near future the two Houses of the Oireachtas will argue for hours about particular constituencies being revised to suit political parties?

In conclusion I should like to make a reference to our health services. In a month's time when local authorities will be called on to examine their estimates we will receive a great shock. The ratepayers will be faced with a severe shock. I fully realise the importance of the health services but this service was known as the choice-of-doctor scheme. Let us hope it will never be said it was the doctors' choice. In 1956 the voluntary health insurance scheme was introduced. One of the things which impressed me was that it was operated by a non-profit making company and it rendered a valuable service. When we are facing our problems in the local authorities let us hope that we will not have to be too harsh on the ratepayers.

Mrs. Farrell

At the outset, I should like to reply to some comments made last night by Senator Robinson. As a rule I do not like to comment on statements made by a member of my own sex or to denigrate what has been said. I listened to the Senator last night with some amazement and amusement. I consider the Senator to be a highly intelligent young lady and I have the height of respect for her learning. She is the darling of the Press. They scribble busily when she speaks and they give her good coverage. That cannot be said for all of us. She quarrelled for quite a long time last night about the number of sitting days of this House during the past year. She laboured the point to a great extent. As I listened to her speech I felt inclined to call across to her: "On how many of those sitting days did you, in fact, attend? More important still, on the days you did sit in the House for how many hours were you present?" If criticism is to be constructive a person must be consistent. I have noted that Senator Robinson comes into the House before she is going to speak. She is present while preparing and delivering her speech and then in 99 cases out of 100 she leaves the House.

In December two years ago Senator Robinson got considerable coverage in the Press for her views that the Seanad had not met during that session. She was interviewed and called upon to speak on the matter. At the only meeting we had in that particular session Senator Robinson was conspicuous by her absence. If she raises the point of Seanad sittings she should be present for those sittings, like other Senators who have to be present all the time.

An Cathaoirleach

The Chair must intervene for just a moment. The Chair is anxious about one particular aspect of the Senator's speech. The daily timetable of any Senator in the House is not listed in the very big list of items we have here in the motion before us. It might be desirable that we get back to that as soon as possible.

Mrs. Farrell

With respect to the Chair, probably it would be a good thing if we had such a list. Senator Robinson commented on the legislation and our performance in the House and, because I sit in the House quite a lot, I feel justified in remarking on her performance in the House.

She discussed the Forcible Entry Act and quarrelled with the Minister for Justice on a number of points. She said that Act was got through quickly because the Minister promised a certain amendment at a later stage. If she calls that a quick passage of legislation I should like to know what is a slow passage. We sat through the whole month of August to get that Act through. I had to sacrifice a holiday which I had planned for for three years. I am just pointing that one has to be consistent in one's remarks.

Comment was also made on the Agricultural Act. The Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries was taken to task because there is a world shortage of beef. Because we put some Agricultural Act through quickly she said as a result of that the price of meat has gone up. How stupid can one get to make comments like that?

The Senator fought about the Adoption Act. She quoted the Minister for Justice at some length. The Minister for Justice did not promise to bring in the Adoption Bill before Christmas. What he said was that he would try to do so. Obviously something is being done about it because he has kept on two members of the Adoption Board who would normally have retired. I do not know whether Senator Robinson objects to the two members being kept on the board and would prefer to see somebody else in their place. It would appear to be impossible to please her.

She did not use her common-sense when she spoke on the Offences Against the State (Amendment) Act. She said we got the legislation through and that it now appeared to be unnecessary.

An Cathaoirleach

The Chair would be relieved if the Senator would get back to the list of items in the motion before us.

Mrs. Farrell

I will relieve the Chair and do so. In answer to Senator Robinson, I would say the Offences Against the State (Amendment) Act was very necessary. She is either not using her common-sense or is not in touch with the common people of this country. Because of that Act there is an absence of the type of protest we had to endure outside the gates of Leinster House before that Act was passed. Did one expect that the jails were going to be filled? Prevention is better than cure. We do not wish to see people jailed but we want to have the power there to make sure that the law is observed.

We also had the spectacle of a copy of the Forcible Entry Act being burned recently. Law-abiding people have nothing to fear from these Acts. The vast majority of people are behind the Government. I have no doubt that, if and when a general election is held, this will be endorsed by the people. If not, then the Government will have got its answer.

Senator W. O'Brien mentioned the lack of employment in his area. It reminded me of a meeting which I attended yesterday of the clothing sector of the Confederation of Irish Industries. This sector of industry cannot get employees and are concerned for the future of their industry because of the lack of trainees. One of the faults of our educational system as at present set up is that the teaching is of an academic nature. Children who get their intermediate or leaving certificates feel somewhat superior and do not take what is termed technical work.

If Senator O'Brien is interested I can give him plenty of names of people who give employment to those who need it provided they take the type of employment offered and in this lies the answer—to take what is offered. At that meeting I found strong criticism of the Revenue Commissioners in respect of customs and excise. It was alleged that many large consignments of goods coming in are not being examined strictly enough. It was stated that goods exported from here to England are subject to much stricter customs examinations and regulations than are goods coming in from that country.

It was also noted that the number of garments coming into this country is increasing but, strangely enough, the average value of these garments is decreasing which would lead one to suspect that some form of dumping is going on. It is difficult to enforce dumping regulations. It must be proved that the goods are not freely on offer in the country of origin. It is said that a number of garments coming in here particularly from England are not freely on offer in England at the prices for which they are being offered here. As a result the price of clothing here is being depressed, and prices of goods exported are being adversely affected.

The regulations providing for examination of goods and ensuring that they are freely available in the country of origin should be enforced more strictly. Branded merchandise is coming in here at prices lower than those obtaining in England. We are all encouraged to export but unless there is a sound home-based market this is impossible and I would impress on the Revenue Commissioners the need to examine what is happening in regard to the import of goods. No doubt there will be a reduction in tariff this year and we will have a greater amount of imports and we must guard our home industry as best we can.

There is great difficulty in travelling by road at present because of the increase in the number of heavy vehicles. It is a hazard to travel from Dublin to Enfield and much of the trouble and delay is caused by lack of consideration and good manners on the part of drivers, particularly some drivers of heavy vehicles. When cars were not as plentiful as now one looked to the drivers of heavy vehicles as being the knights of the road and those who were most courteous and helpful. Time schedule pressures are increasing but there is a regulation or rule—I do not know which—that you leave a distance of five times the length of your vehicle between you and the next vehicle.

We now see four, five or six heavy lorries, some with trailers, one right behind the other. It is almost impossible to pass one of them, let alone five in a row, without smashing into somebody or something. Foras Forbartha recently made a survey on drunken driving; I wonder why they did not make a survey to see in what percentage of cases a heavy lorry is either the direct or indirect cause of an accident. A large percentage of accidents is caused by heavy lorries.

I have spoken many times outside the House on this matter and have meant to put it on paper to the Minister for Local Government. I heard on an English news bulletin lately that a survey carried out on the M.1 proved that 40 per cent of the accidents are caused either directly or indirectly by heavy lorries. We are fast getting to that stage in this country. Yesterday morning when I was driving to Dublin on a slippery road I saw a train of four lorries, the first one was travelling at approximately three miles per hour up the hill in Lucan and another one behind attempting to pass it on a bend as I was coming down around that bend. Such driving is nothing short of criminal. On occasion I have had to go in on the shoulder of the road where lorries pull out directly in the face of on-coming traffic and one can get either out of the way or stop and it is one's hard luck if one does not. The fellow in the cab will escape unscathed but the driver of the car has no chance.

The ideal thing would be to build a fine new motorway to the west. I have no doubt it will come in time but there will be many deaths on that road caused by the hazards I am speaking about. Some regulation should be brought in, if it is not the law already under the Road Traffic Act to ensure that heavy vehicles are not travelling too close to each other.

Mr. O'Higgins

Unfortunately, I was not here to listen to Senator Keery yesterday but, from the necessarily abbreviated report of his speech which appears in the Press, it seems he began on a nostalgic note, that he had a yearning to hear me read out the Fianna Fáil election manifesto and, according to this report, he seemed to suggest that my failure to be here in order to do that implied that there was an air of resignation on this side of the House. I am sorry to disappoint such a charming Senator as Senator Keery but I regret to inform him that my inability to lead off this debate for this side of the House was due to the fact that I was engaged at a meeting in this building which may shorten the life of the present Government.

I am also sorry to disappoint Senator Keery in omitting to read out the election manifesto but it is a matter of time. I have it here and if I am tempted before I finish, I may do it.

Mrs. Farrell

The Cathaoirleach will not allow one to make another speech.

Mr. O'Higgins

This was far more than a speech. I do not know if it will disappoint Senator Keery and the other Senators for me to say that I do not intend making a political speech. Leaving aside the situation in the North, to which a number of speakers have referred, the outstanding feature of the last 12 months was the decision of the people of this country to join the EEC. Apart from that things were normal enough. Unemployment continued at its usual high rate. The cost of living continued to increase and we had the usual quota of expulsions from the Fianna Fáil Party.

Mr. Honan

There were a few shakers on your side also.

Mr. O'Higgins

A number of Senators have referred to the question of unemployment. It is a tragedy that the unemployment figures should continue to be so high. Anxiety was expressed in connection with our decision to join the EEC, that consequent on EEC membership we might have a number of redundancies causing unemployment here. It is disturbing that virtually all of the unemployment that has afflicted this State so far is unemployment which has occurred entirely under our own management without any impact of EEC membership on the situation here.

I was glad to note the apparent success of the Taoiseach's efforts in America recently to interest Americans in further promoting industry in this country. I sincerely hope that the hopes he has expressed in that direction will come to fruition. I would like to refer briefly to another aspect of the Taoiseach's visit to America and that is that this particular visit, in the public sense, was not, according to news reports a particularly pleasant one and that there were organised protests of one sort or another. I utterly deplore that. Whatever views we may have with regard to the political activity of the head of the Irish Government—and certainly we are not going to pull our punches in dealing with him or his party or policy—the instinctive reaction of any Irishman or woman living in this country is to feel a sense of disgust that the head of an Irish Government should be subjected, apparently by Irishmen, to that kind of treatment when he was representing this country on foreign soil. I want to record that I utterly deplore the treatment to which he was subjected on that occasion.

As regards the cost of living I want to renew a plea which was made by my party at the time of the EEC referendum and which met with some response from the Government. The Government should commit themselves to utilising whatever savings are made in agricultural subsidies, by reason of EEC membership, to the fullest possible extent for the purpose of easing the situation of the weaker sections of our community in the context of the spiralling cost of living. The cost of living has reached the stage where it has become a burden even on the backs of comparatively wealthy people. The poorer sections of the community must find it extremely difficult to withstand the weight of this burden.

When I talk about the weaker sections of the community I am not talking entirely about the social welfare classes. I am also thinking in terms of widows who in the past may have been regarded as reasonably well-off but who, for a number of years, have been living on dividends or fixed incomes of one sort or another. These are people who are not in employment, many of them may have to draw on capital in order to have nearly the same standard of living as they had in the past on their dividend income. These people have no other way of saving than to cut down on the necessaries of life. They do not go on expensive holidays during the summer. They cannot cut down on the size of their cars because they have none. When the cost of living increases, as it is doing steadily, and when they have no additional income to keep pace with it the only thing they can do is cut down on the necessaries of life. I want to see those people helped in whatever way the Government can help them, particularly now that as a result of EEC membership there will be money available that could be used for their assistance.

I wish to refer very briefly to the recent announcement of the Government in connection with grant houses and the proposals which have been announced by the Government in connection with supervision, rather than control, of house prices. I am not speaking against the effort of the Minister for Local Government and his Department to do something in this field but I question whether the method adopted by the Minister is likely to do anything other than further penalise those who need houses and who find themselves paying high prices for them.

What the Minister has done is to take a decision that, from 1st May onwards, it will be necessary to obtain a certificate of reasonable value before grant approval will be given. If a builder does not succeed in obtaining the necessary certificate no grant approval will issue in respect of that house. No matter how it operated on a practical basis, the whole idea and concept of building grants was to aid house purchasers. It was not brought into operation for the purpose of putting an extra dollar into the pockets of the builders but to assist the purchaser of the house or the person having his house built.

A further worthwhile effort was made by the Government some years ago to assist house purchasers when, in relation to grant houses, they granted exemption from stamp duty. The present position is that for a newly-built house the deed of conveyance of that house to the purchaser is completely exempt from stamp duty provided the certificate of grant approval has been obtained and a copy of it is produced to the stamping authorities in Dublin Castle. One of the results of the measure which the Minister is now taking is to ensure that in addition to the purchaser of the house losing the benefit of the grant, the house purchaser will also lose the benefit of the exemption or remission from stamp duty which would be applicable to his house had the certificate of grant approval been issued.

Those two financial penalties, which will be imposed under this scheme, are penalties on the purchaser and not on the builder. If there is an acute housing shortage and if newly-married couples have to get a house they will have to get the house whether it costs them more or less. All that will happen under this new regulation will be that, in the case of a house not qualifying for the certificate of reasonable value, the builder will still be able to sell the house but the purchaser will not get the benefit of the grant or the remission of stamp duty.

If the Government have come to the conclusion, in relation to the building trade, that in some instances exorbitant profits are being made, they should review the position to see how it could be remedied in relation to the builder and not in relation to the purchaser. They must find out how price control can operate so that the person who will get less profit out of it will be the builder rather than to operate a price control system the ultimate effect of which will be to impose two financial penalties on the purchaser. I know this is not easy to achieve. I do not know enough about house costings, in terms of materials, labour and wages, to give any judgment as to whether or not excessive profits are being made, but if the Government have come to the conclusion that excessive profits are being made by some builders, then the aim of any scheme should be to stabilise prices by reducing builders' profits rather than by penalising house purchasers.

It was a regrettable decision, on the part of the Minister and the Government, to sack the RTE Authority. I do not wish to enter into any lengthy discussion on this point but the impression given to the public was that there was a certain amount of confusion and misunderstanding arising out of the directive that the Minister had given under the Broadcasting Act. If that is so— and I believe that is the impression the public have—it was up to the Minister as well as the RTE Authority to do everything possible to iron out any misunderstandings and to clarify any difficulties or confusion that had arisen before taking the step which the Minister took. Where you have a situation in which the entire RTE Authority can be sacked and, within a matter of minutes, the formation of a new RTE Authority can be announced by the Minister, it does not inspire confidence.

I am not one of those who believe that the RTE Authority or those in positions of control regarding programmes are entitled to do exactly what they like and to present on television screens exactly what they like. At the same time, I take the view very strongly that the national radio and television service is not, and cannot be allowed to become, an arm of the Government, certainly in political matters. Public policy must be settled by the Oireachtas, and the exigencies of the national situation must be understood, first of all in the Oireachtas, and secondly in the national broadcasting and television service. Not only must it be understood but it must be interpreted and presented by them in a way which conforms with national aims and national policy and which does not, in any way, endanger the security of this State. I reject very vehemently any suggestion that RTE should be used, or should be allowed to become, merely an instrument for expressing the policy of any political party that happens to be in government. I am sorry that this situation arose. It is regrettable that the Minister and the Government took the step they did in relation to the RTE Authority.

As regards the question of RTE programmes generally, there are probably as many different views on them as there are Members of this House. I think some of the productions are excellent; others I do not care for. Some of the current affairs programmes are excellent, but I considered some of them to be unbalanced. I know that the question of balance is also a difficult one, whether you have to balance in the same programme, or whether you put on a balancing programme later. I remember seeing one programme—I think it was a "7 Days" programme —in connection with the drug problem, which I though was an excellent and well worthwhile presentation.

I should like to pay a small tribute, which I paid here before, to the newscasters on RTE. We are extremely fortunate in having newscasters who are not only so pleasing in appearance but who are able to give us the benefit of diction that is very easy and very nice to listen to. They are often the forgotten people of television because we are so accustomed to seeing them and so accustomed to the fact that they are going to read out the news. They do an extremely good job and they compare favourably with similar services provided by other television networks I have seen.

I should like to inquire from the Minister to what extent the Government have decided, and are, in fact, active, on endeavouring to assist the thalidomide victims in this country. This is a matter which is of concern to everyone and it is one in which the Government should be actively interested, both in endeavouring to bring about a reasonable settlement of the claims and, if necessary, in taking on a certain amount of financial responsibility themselves.

I mentioned personally to the Minister, and I just want to mention it very briefly for the record here, that with regard to the operation of VAT, there appear to be possible anomalies. I called the Minister's attention to one privately. It seems to me that under the VAT Act a situation has been created unintentionally where, in certain circumstances, a new tax is being imposed which I feel certain it was not intended to impose. A situation could arise where not only is a new tax being imposed where it was not intended that it should be imposed, but it is conceivable that it might have to be paid on the double. If necessary, I will come back to that again on another occasion.

The final point I want to mention is in connection with portion of the contribution by my colleague, Senator John Kelly. When speaking about certain changes which had been proposed, partly constitutional, partly on legislation, I think Senator Kelly referred to a "suede shoes concensus". I thought it was a very striking phrase. I admire both the sincerity and the vigour with which the Senator expresses his views and deals with issues which arise. Whatever about suede shoes, he is a person who is prepared to shed the velvet glove, when necessary. On the question of a suede shoes concensus in relation to some changes, constitutional and otherwise, I made my views fairly clear in this House, and they are understood in my own party as well.

In relation to a number of these changes—I want to say it quite bluntly —I would prefer to stand with the brogue brigade than with the suede shoe wearers. We are living in a time of change, and in a time when there are new ideas, and when ideas travel far quicker from one part of the world to the other than they did in the past. I would hope that we, in Ireland, would always be prepared to test and try new ideas, new thoughts, and new changes that may be proposed and to measure them against the values which were treasured by our parents and by their parents before them.

In many ways we have had a sheltered, protected existence which others had not had, but we have had true values and those values have been handed down from generation to generation. While I am not a traditionalist merely for the sake of tradition, neither am I in favour of change merely for the sake of change We should have no hesitation in rejecting anything which we regard as bad or weak either in our past or in our present set-up. Equally we should not be ashamed to hold on to and treasure those things which we have found to be good, which we have found to be valuable and which we have found to give true value to our people.

Mr. Killilea

Before I begin my contribution, a Chathaoirleach, I should like to take the opportunity, as I did not have the chance on a previous occasion, to congratulate you on your appointment to the Chair, and to wish you every luck in keeping your office in the high esteem to which the House is accustomed.

This debate affords us an opportunity of reviewing the events of the year, discussing the work of the Departments, and making suggestions which we think would be helpful, particularly in our own areas. The debate so far, with the exception of one speaker yesterday, has been quite constructive.

I should like to comment on the effect of our entry into the EEC in the context of farming. From the census figures recently printed we know that Irish agriculture is the largest employer of people in the nine countries of the EEC. We have approximately 282,000 people out of a working population of 1,071,000, working on the land. Together with feeding this nation they are making a contribution to the country to the tune of about 18 per cent of the total income. This is significant. One must compliment the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries on the way they promoted agriculture during the years prior to EEC entry. All those who took part in preparing agriculture for EEC entry played a very vital role. This does not mean we can afford to sit on our laurels. We must watch two things: rationalisation and utilisation. I should like to comment on utilisation because rationalisation in the West of Ireland is not very prevalent. Utilisation to help agriculture is very important.

I want to refer first to the Irish Land Commission in connection with the delay in dividing estates, particularly in Galway. The Land Commission have done a very good job in County Galway down through the years. It is only in recent months that anomalies have arisen, particularly in one case where a cleric from America got an estate in a congested area where 14 farmers were looking for a subdivision. The Land Commission, against the recommendations of the county officials, gave the cleric three years to look after the estate. I fail to understand that decision. It was made by the Commissioners in Dublin and was commented on elsewhere. This action is alien to the thoughts of the people who have always admired the work of the Land Commission.

The Land Commission are still the biggest landlords in County Galway. For various reasons, some perhaps genuine, they hold vast tracts of land, and in some cases have held them for up to 12 years without subdividing them. That land is not being utilised to its full extent. They do not allow it to be distributed for growing crops. The grass is neglected and therefore is unproductive. If the Land Commission could grasp this nettle and divide this land, our working population in a small farming county would increase and everybody would be better off.

Another item which is causing a lot of trouble is the Corrib, Mask and Moy drainage which has left vast tracts of land, some of it commonage, some of it callows, well-drained but undivided. Therefore, farmers who own 60 or 70 acres of it cannot utilise it in grass production or tillage. It would not cost a great deal of money to fence off the portions of those callows and give each man his right to utilise that particular portion. A little has been done and it has proved very successful. It should be treated as a priority. Drainage has cost so much money that the land should be utilised to its fullest extent.

A pension scheme was inaugurated some time ago for old farmers, bachelors and people not utilising their land. While it is a good scheme, it has not been implemented to a very great extent. I should like to see the scheme being implemented so that our educated youth could utilise the land and make a better living for themselves and their families.

There is a peculiar situation existing in County Galway regarding the liaison between the ESB, the IDA and the county development team. One example is a small industry which was established in the heart of the country. It employed several small farmers living nearby. They applied for a grant to the county development team and got £2,000 which was considered a great achievement. They then applied for three phase electricity to the ESB. By the time it had been installed £1,100 of the £2,000 was spent. The principle of the giving of the £2,000 was destroyed because it was meant for development and for training. The principle of helping those individuals was destroyed by another semi-State organisation, the ESB. I know the ESB cannot break rules and regulations but something must be done, at Government level, to improve liaison in such cases.

We welcome rural electrification and its extension. Some years ago in some areas a majority of the people would not accept rural electrification although there were people who tried to get it. They failed because a majority of the people did not want it. They are now getting it and, having got it are now penalised to the same extent as those who refused to take it in the first instance.

Every year I have to talk about the Irish Sugar Company and their enterprises in my county. Some Senators here today may say glibly that the Senator from Galway is not entitled to talk about potatoes when, for the first time in the history of the county, a semi-State organisation is importing from Britain. There is a genuine explanation for this. Yesterday there was great commotion in the national newspapers, and explanations and condemnations of the situation. The Irish Times referred to the welshers on contracts with the Erin Foods plant in Tuam. There is a reason for the welshing and it is quite simple. For the past four years the potato growers have suffered abnormally low prices for potatoes. They were dumped on the headlands of their fields and unable to be sold. They decided they were sick of this and just would not grow potatoes because there was no constructive market—hence the shortfall in the growth of potatoes. They are a positive and natural part of our diet. Nobody has given up eating them. We need as many potatoes this year as we did last year.

I should also like to contradict the leading article in The Irish Times which said that the price of potatoes on the open market today is twice the price of potatoes under contract to Erin Foods. That is not true. The price of potatoes on the open market today is more than three times the price of potatoes under contract to Erin Foods in Tuam.

When one sees so much good done to a part of our county by a semi-State organisation such as the Sugar Company one feels slow to criticise. We feel compassionate and say: "If we do not make some contribution to help, then we will lose something we have. We are not utilising something we have." As regards the production of potatoes we have reached a stage where something positive must be done. We must have a potato marketing or grading board so that guaranteed quality potatoes will be offered to the housewives of this and every city at a guaranteed price. The best potatoes must be on sale at a good price. If we do that we will leave to the manufacturers of canned or flaked potatoes a certain amount so that they will have enough to work with and can plan ahead. The potato industry must be harnessed now. It cannot wait until next year.

This can be done in three ways. The existing Potato Marketing Board, which deals with seed potatoes, could be expanded. We could set up a new Potato Marketing representative of all interested parties, the growers, the manufacturers and the housewives. Then everybody will know where everybody stands and what everybody needs. We will not have this stop-go policy of £40 a ton this year and £8 a ton next year. I have suggested this on a number of occasions and it has been accepted by a number of organisations, but that is all that has happened. I was merely putting forward an idea. I was leaving it to those deeply implicated to get around the table and see what they could work out. Nothing has been done since. There are people in my own town with wives and children depending on a positive policy being drawn up so that they can work freely and with good morale for many years ahead in an industry that is giving good employment.

The Irish Times and other newspapers described those growers as welshers. I do not support any man who does not stand by his word or his contract. Having said that, I realise why this has happened. For the past five years potatoes sent to the Tuam plant were negotiated at varying prices from £10 10s to £12. The price remains the same today. It is an unrealistic price. It is the only commodity under contract that has not risen in price; hence the fall-off in the production of potatoes. The responsibility lies with the negotiators and the Sugar Company. They sat down and hoped the lot would fall into their laps when they should have seen what was going to happen. Costs have risen in the past four or five years but the price of the commodity has not risen. That could not last. Those two sets of people were living in a dreamland if they thought that in 1973 they would get potatoes at £11 per ton. It was not on.

Now we had condemnations from speakers on television last night, but they have not to turn so far in their chairs to find people The Irish Times describe as welshers. The biggest number of welshers come from Meath and Louth. They were told last spring for some reason unknown to me, that they would get no potato contracts. The biggest men supplying anything from 1,000 to 2,000 tons of potatoes to our plant, who sit at the conference table to negotiate the price, are the biggest welshers to the Tuam plant. It is not the farmer in the west of Ireland who is the welsher. He has supplied approximately 50 per cent of the contract he signed for. Accepting that, due to the bad spring last year, there was an off-fall of something like 25 per cent he is not such a big sinner. The Departments of Agriculture and Fisheries and Finance should grasp this thorn, get down to business and keep a £1 million industry floating with ease and with good morale among those who run it.

Yesterday, to add injury to insult as I walked through a supermarket in this city I discovered on sale some varieties of what is known as "super mash." This is now distributed by two firms, Durnley and Cadbury. It is a potato mash manufactured in England and is on sale in Irish-owned supermarkets in Dublin.

Mr. Fitzsimons

With Green Shield stamps.

Mr. Killilea

I do not think there were. We got the cut before the Green Shield. This is a limited market which has been developed by Erin Foods. I do not understand why firms are allowed by the Department of Industry and Commerce to put their produce on sale in this country in such a limited market. On making further inquiries I discovered that the price of that commodity in this city is 19 per cent less than the price of that particular mash in the United Kingdom.

I then asked if we had in this country protection under An Coimisiún Dumpála. If these firms wanted to cash in on this market under EEC terms they may not be allowed to do so. Could they not have come to the Erin plant in Tuam and said, "Here are our packets, will you put your product in them at a price?" We got Liverpool potatoes in fancy bags without one penny being paid in subsidy. I urge that a full investigation should be made by the Minister for Industry and Commerce into this situation. The Import Duties Act is contravened here. No research has been made into the type of varieties of potatoes. It is important to get a greater tonnage produced here and then to look at the price structure which could be reduced if we could be guaranteed this tonnage.

It will be a sad day for Tuam if utilisation of this industry is not carried out in the maximum capacity. There have also been teething troubles with the sugar factory in Tuam since the day it was founded. It is a viable and important plant nevertheless. Recently the Government granted £5 million in subsidy for modernisation of the plants. I hope that the board and officials of the Sugar Company in this city will invest their share of that money in the modernisation of that plant to make it viable and modern. In our county we are dependent to a large extent on this industry. We could not accept the devaluation of this industry and we are giving timely warning of this. If there is rationalisation in the sugar industry now is the time, if we have plans for rationalisation, to say so and let it be debated coolly and calmly.

I demand to see that we get our equal share of the £5 million for that industry, which badly needs a morale booster. There is no excuse for its degradation.

Two years ago I suggested something should be done regarding the importation of farm machinery and the amount of money leaving the country each year. It was £10 million then and I expect the amount has increased since. I was told then that a committee were sitting to investigate this situation. I have not heard of any positive action by this committee to stop the importation of machinery. At that time I suggested that the Tuam sugar people take over a fair slice of this cake. They had the personnel then and have them now to continue to do it. It has been expanded in Mallow but it has not, except in one case, gone outside the limitations of the sugar industry. I was talking then in the terms of all farm machinery not just a section of it. New consideration should be given to it now in the light of benefits which would accrue to the nation.

We have a turf cutting industry which works out at about £100,000 a year in Connacht. It is a service given to small farmers and they are now liable for value-added tax. I should like the Minister to investigate the matter with a view to giving this portion of farm work freedom from value-added tax.

I should like to say, in regard to RTE, that something had better be done soon, bearing in mind the rubbish seen on our channel over Christmas. It is a public disgrace to expect educated people to accept the type of rubbish that we saw during Christmas. There was not one decent programme on television.

Mr. Doyle

Maureen Potter.

Mr. Killilea

She has limitations, too. In Connacht where we have no choice of channels we are paying the £7 licence. I have relations in this city paying the same price for their licence and when I visit them I can get about five different channels. From our point of view that is not value for money. It is unfair that some people have more privileges than others. I am not complaining about the price of the licence but the value we get from it. The Dublin Senators probably did not understand what I said about the bad programmes over Christmas—they were probably tuned in to other channels. Telefís Éireann should either put up or shut up. I should like to be able to say next year in this House that we thank Telefís Éireann for the work done during 1973 when we all have had an equal choice of stations. I am hinting at being given a little help for the supposed backward people, those poor fellows down in the West of Ireland—give us an equal chance to have our choice of television programmes.

Mr. J. Fitzgerald

Since this debate opened at 3 p.m. yesterday we have covered a wide area. Many problems were referred to, particularly the problem of redundancy. I am taking part in this debate because of a news item in this morning's newspapers. It referred to the closure of the Tara shoe factory at Kells. This is a small factory and employed about 64 people. Half of those employees were married men who had been employed in that factory for more than 25 years. We have a certain amount of sympathy for those people because their outlook is bleak. After 25 years service all they get is two weeks' notice and are told that their services are no longer required.

The number of redundancies in 1972 was in the region of 3,000 to 4,000 and since the beginning of 1973 redundancy again seems to be rearing its ugly head. In the context of these figures, 64 redundancies seems to be a small statistic, but one must realise that redundancy is an important matter to each of these individuals, but 64 redundancies in a small town like Kells will have a great impact on the economic life of that town. There was one particle of good in that news item this morning and it is to the effect that the men are giving consideration to the taking over and the working of the factory themselves. They are going to follow the example of the Crannac factory at Navan. I am sure you are as well aware of that factory closing down and reopening as I am. I hope that the lead which was set by the workers in the Crannac factory will be followed by the workers in the Tara shoe factory in Kells. I realise that if those people hope to reopen and continue to work in the Tara shoe factory they will need the goodwill of the Minister and other agencies of the State to enable them to get the loan and grant that will be required to enable them to keep this factory going.

If they display the same courage and ability as the workers in the Crannac factory have displayed—they have proved since they reopened it that they are capable of carrying on a viable business—I am sure the workers in the Tara shoe factory will have the same success. I appeal to the Minister to be sympathetic and to use all the influence that he has got with the agencies of the State to ensure that financial aid will be available to these workers to enable them to continue in their employment. Courage was displayed in a small factory in Dundalk and in Navan. The men there had the courage to take over and carry on without becoming a liability on the State. These type of people should be encouraged and I am sure the Minister will give every encouragement that is within his power to the employees of the Tara shoe factory in Kells.

Mr. Doyle

Senator Killilea has stolen all my thunder here. I am going to be a bit parochial-minded and speak about Tipperary. Tipperary was mentioned as one of the six richest counties in Ireland. I should like to ask the Minister for Finance sometime how he came to this conclusion. A year ago there was great concern concerning the quota that we would have for sugar beet when we entered the EEC. We were all thankful to our then Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dr. Hillery, for the wonderful job he did. However, after 12 months we have a certain amount of concern again. We are worried because the farmers are showing little concern for the sugar beet industry. It was once a thriving industry in North Tipperary.

I come from a town which is completely dependent on that industry for employment. I am a fairly extensive beet grower and I believe farmers are correct in looking for improved prices for their product. People in this part of the country may think they are going cap-in-hand when looking for improvements in the prices of beet crops. Anyone with experience of growing this crop will realise that it is a very difficult operation and that we cannot expect people to stay in the industry unless they are amply compensated for their efforts because there are many other lines of farming open to them.

Apart from the price of beet, there is something wrong with the public relations that exist between the Sugar Company and the growers. The time has now come when the farmers will not come looking for buyers—the buyers will have to look for the farmers and thank God for it. I am glad that the Minister for Finance is present today because this industry comes under his care. I should like him to seek out whatever is wrong with the industry and make some effort to remedy it. I often wonder if the people in the boardroom in Dublin fully understand what things are really like at local level. I believe that some of their governing power should be transferred along the line. This may sound a trivial thing to them but it is an important matter to the farmers.

Farmers are sensitive people. If you treat them in the right way they will co-operate with you but if you try to drive them against their will they can be very stubborn indeed. At present we will have to hold out our hand to them so that we can keep going an industry which has meant so much to us in the past. I should like to thank the Government, and particularly my own party, for the part they played in keeping that industry alive many years ago when things were difficult.

Senator Killilea has mentioned many of the matters I had in mind to raise but I am especially concerned for the sugar factory in Thurles. A few years ago farmers were clamouring for contracts for beet production but now its attractions have fallen off. It is a shame for us to have to say that a great deal of the beet now comes from another county. Something will have to be done to save this industry. There will be no point in talking about it when the industry has deteriorated to such an extent that nothing can be done to salvage it. I hope the Minister will consult with those responsible for fixing the price of beet and that they will come to a satisfactory figure in the shortest time possible. Every day spent arguing about this matter is only doing further damage to the industry. In thanking him for what he has done in the past, I hope he will make every effort to solve this problem in the near future.

Dr. West

Ba mhaith liom cúpla focal a rá ar an dTuaisceart. It trua go bhfuil an cás chomh h-uafásach. Ní féidir leis na daoine ar an dá thaobh caidreamh lena chéile faid atá marú agus slad ann. Is éigin dúinn gach cabhair a thúirt dóibh chun teacht le chéile agus dul chun cinn a dhéanamh.

I should like to say something about the formation during the year of the Dáil all-party committee on Irish unity. Having been an advocate of joint action by all parties of the Oireachtas, I must say that I was particularly glad to see something like this being done. I thoroughly support the idea, but there are two points that struck me very forcibly. First of all, the situation in the North has many facets: there are two main parts to the problem, the political problem and the problem of community division which has many psychological overtones. One such overtone, or undertone, affects the very name of the committee, namely, that we should have chosen a committee with a name "a committee on Irish unity". It is a pity that the phrase "Irish unity" came up in the title.

Everybody who sat on that committee and all the political parties are committed to achieving unity by nonviolent means or by agreement among Irish people. I subscribe to that view. However, we ought to take into account in everything we do and in everything we say what affect our actions or our words have on the Northern community. The very fact that a committee with this title were set up was a misjudgment. We could have put the aims of the committee under a different title. People in the North to whom I talked on the subject said: "This is just another attempt to take us over". This is the great fear of the Unionist or Protestant population in the North. When they see a committee composed of Irish politicians meeting to discuss Irish unity they think of it in terms of a take-over.

One of my main aims in my involvement in the Northern situation is to persuade people in the North that this is not so—that we only wish to work with them on terms agreeable to people in both parts of the country. I think the word "harmony" is a more important word at this time than "unity" which I must confess I do not see coming in the near future. I am certain that progress will only be made with joint work between our Government and a new Northern administration which must be set up.

I do not see unity in the near future. The very use of the word is a barrier to our progress, so let us not be afraid to clear that barrier. I made a submission to this committee and I would like to mention briefly a number of the points I made, some of which I am glad to say have been dealt with or have been promised to be dealt with in the current year. These two particular points were: the deletion of Article 44 of the Constitution, which was carried out after the referendum, and the amendment of section 12 of the Adoption Act of 1952, which has not been made but has been specifically promised by the Minister for Justice in a debate in this House.

It is pleasant to be able to record progress made during the year which will help to allay fear in the North. Further progress must be made concerning our Constitution and our laws on family morality and in other non-legislative sphere. I do not intend to list the progress that must be made because I have done this on many occasions before and there has been a fair measure of agreement on quite a few of these. I hope that the Government will be encouraged to push forward with this programme of improving our whole legislation and our Constitution and making real allowances for the feelings of the Northern majority.

However, there are two sides to this problem and all efforts to make progress on the political fronts are being hamstrung by the community division. It is regrettable that there are still several bodies in existence which exploit this division. The extremists on both sides of the fence would not be in existence were it not for this community division. The extremists on both sides feed on this division, and it is in their interests to see that the division does not disappear. As the fighting and the killing continue it becomes more difficult to really tackle this problem. Until we do tackle the problem and make real inroads into it, our attempts at getting really concrete political moves going are doomed to failure. While this division exists there will be prejudice and there will be the constant reaction of one side to proposals by the other. No matter how reasonable are the proposals made by one side, the opposite side continually turn them down. This can only be tackled on a non-political level.

I should like to pay tribute to the many people in the North, and indeed to people and organisations in the South as well, who are making attempts to overcome the sectarian prejudice. This is being done by politicians in their individual capacities. I should like to see more recognition of this problem by all the political parties. At last we are beginning to see some real progress being made on the religious front, but the churches have a great deal of neglect to make up. However, we can encourage them to move more rapidly together towards ecumenism and towards real meaningful dialogue. Anything we can do on these lines is worth doing.

Violence has increased hatred and increased division. In this part of the country we have firmly rejected violence. It is a pity that firmer measures against men of violence were not taken earlier. However, they have been taken and similar measures will have to be taken against the Protestant extremists in the North. Some sort of cooling off period will be needed, if many of the violent men are put out of circulation, before the fears in the minds of the moderate people will lessen, to the extent required for genuine dialogue. From that point of view we have no option but to continue to be severe on people in this part of the country who attack, or who advocate attacks on, their fellow Irishmen in the North.

It is important that more should be done by religious leaders than merely condemning the outrages and the assassinations. They meet regularly to issue these statements, but I have noticed the institutionalised churches obstructing progress which is essential, progress which is required to get dialogue going between the different religious groups on the deeper causes of division among the churches. The churches should be discussing constitutional change: family morality, education and the Ne Temere decree. They have made certain moves and forward-thinking people have encouraged them to get these discussions going, but somehow the churches, as institutions, act like political parties and have not just come to the point where they can get together and discuss these things.

We, as politicians, should point out firmly that this is one of the major areas where progress is needed. It is only by attacking this problem of community division, of trying to bring the people together. There are many schemes in the North at present with this precise aim.

An interesting change which has come about in the Northern people is that now, for the first time, they sincerely realise how important this contact is for both sides if progress is to be achieved; to get together and talk freely man to man, discuss their real differences and find what they have in common. When this happens you get a different view of the problem. I urge anybody who can influence the situation to do their utmost to get such dialogue going. It will help to thaw the political situation and allow progress to be made along normal political channels. That progress, as is clear to everyone, is very slow.

I should like to speak about two other items which occur in the Votes on the Act we are discussing. The first item comes under Vote 41 and concerns the Minister for Transport and Power. The administration of his Department, in particular the transport end, will soon become impossible in the suburban areas unless a radical approach is taken towards solving the problem of congestion. This is patently clear to all of us. I am probably the only Member of this House who is not a car owner. I cycle happily up and down, not from Cork to the Seanad but from nearer by. Even that is becoming a difficult task in Dublin, not so much because of crossing the lanes, which is bad enough, but because of the ever-increasing diesel and petrol fumes which make survival on a bicycle a difficult business.

I should like to comment briefly on the problem of the motor car and its dominance of our lives. Unless we deal with this problem of the motor car, and the private car in particular, we are heading for real trouble—that is, if we do not have it already—in our major cities. It is not enough to say we will build new superhighways, knock down all the old buildings, essentially desecrate our cities and make them palaces for the motor car. Human beings are more important than motor cars and cities have character which is worth preserving. We cannot drive highways wherever we like in suburban areas. In any case the number of motor cars in the country is increasing at such a rapid rate that however fast we build our highways we will not keep up with the growth of motor cars at least in suburban areas. We must restrict the access of motor vehicles to the city centres.

A good deal of controversy has been going on in public about this matter because the problem has been so pressing. The Minister for Industry and Commerce, a week ago in Cork, was caught in a traffic jam two miles from the place of his appointment and he had to get out in the pouring rain and walk the couple of miles to his meeting. He will, therefore, have a first-hand knowledge of how bad the situation is in Cork.

This time last year a competition was run in Cork asking for people to submit their solutions to the problem in Cork city. Certain specific statistics and data were supplied. The solution which won second prize appealed to me a great deal. It was produced by Mr. Francis Richardson who is a native of Cork county but is at present a town planner in East Kilbride in Scotland. He produced a paper which forecast quite simply that in the present climate, unless there is change, we can expect the complete collapse of public transport as we know it in the suburban areas. The car is more convenient and gets to a place quicker. The buses cannot operate with the tremendous congestion which exists at present. However, there are serious disadvantages to the great influx of cars in the city. At peak hours, morning and evening, cars carry an average of 1.5 passengers each while the latest buses carry more than 70 passengers seated. Thus, one bus can carry the same number of passengers as can more than 50 cars. Therefore, if the buses could be given a reasonable clear run we would be getting somewhere. That is the whole problem.

How do you regulate the access of the private car or commercial vehicles to city centres? Mr. Richardson's solution was to use the laws of supply and demand. Essentially it cut down private parks in city centres. At the moment our local authority rules require parking space to be provided by the developers of new blocks of offices and flats. This only increases the problem. The solution would be to meter the whole of the centre city area and allow short and long-term parking but in a way that would be concomitant with the problems which the private car causes by coming in and going out, often at peak times. The all-street parking should be cut out and the prices made realistic. Mr. Richardson has some figures which show that in the case of Cork city there would be some 4,000 to 5,000 parking meter spaces in the central and suburban shopping centre area within the main city. At an average charge per meter of 10p per hour the revenue per annum per meter would be around £250. This is a considerably higher charge than is made at the moment.

Supposing you install 4,500 meters this would give you a return in revenue of something in the region of £1 million. It would make parking more difficult. Motorists would have to pay a realistic price for parking in the city centre. It would do two things. It would raise the revenue to £1 million and would considerably clear the congestion. People who did not bring their cars into the city would move to public transport which would receive the £1 million subsidy thereby enabling it to reduce its fares, give an increased service and because the congestion was reduced it would increase the efficiency of the service by over 100 per cent. Mr. Richardson points out that as long ago as the 1920s the manager of the London omnibus company stated he could improve his bus speeds by only two miles per hour, he could take 100 buses off the streets, make £100,000 more profit each year and serve the same number of passengers better. It is clear that something similar could be done on a smaller scale in Irish cities.

Until we tackle the private car owner and his access to the city centre in a manner such as this there is no hope that we will ever beat the increasing congestion problem. The sad thing is that this will not happen until the congestion becomes so bad that the average citizen puts enough pressure on the legislature or the local authorities to do something about it. Sooner or later we will have to make a move on this. The installation of extra meters is a relatively simple idea. It does not involve building enormous highways or knocking down valuable buildings. It is straightforward and simple. It uses the law of supply and demand which is generally the best regulator and would give us a more efficient, far cheaper and far more frequent public transport service. That is the only way to solve his problem.

I should like to refer to Votes Nos. 43 and 44 concerning army remuneration, particularly Vote No. 44 —the provision for pensions, compensation and gratuities paid to the Defence Forces. I have had a very lengthy correspondence with the Minister for Defence on a problem which was brought to my notice concerning the payment of gratuities in the Defence Forces or, to be more correct, the fact that a gratuity which is paid on retirement as a resettlement grant to married members of the force is not paid to single officers, NCOs or privates. A married man has some additional expenses in life. Let us face that but he is paid considerably more in the force than a single man and he gets a higher pension. In terms of comparative pay a single officer who serves his full tour is paid some £20,000 less than a married officer of equivalent service. That is the figure over one's whole career in the army if one complete's a full tour. It has nothing to do with gratuities. It is just the differential. The gratuity works out for officers at something between £3,000 and £5,000. In an age where we are moving towards equal treatment for married and unmarried people there is no case for not paying the gratuity to single members of the force, especially when one realises that married members of the force by the time they leave have bought and are living in their own houses. The single man by the regulations as they stand has got to live in barracks and, therefore, must acquire accommodation on retiring. The chances are that his parents will not be alive. He will have to set up a home for himself and he gets no gratuity to help him. This is an anomaly which should be rectified.

Single members of the Army in particular have to abide by the regulations which require them to live in barracks for their full term of service. Some of our barracks are not as modern or pleasant as they might be. In fact, some of them are decidedly antiquated. Having been in them, I can testify to this. Some of the regulations which concern the behaviour of the residents are rather victorian. There are regulations concerning entertainment and meeting members of the opposite sex— and sometimes single men like to meet members of the opposite sex!

Mr. Honan

The soldiers you know must be queer fellows.

Dr. West

Not in the wrong sense, Senator Honan. The soldiers I know are fine characters who have quite a justifiable grievance. I inquired from the Minister for Defence what was the extent of this problem. In a letter dated 22nd April, 1971 he stated that at that time the number of single men in service who were elegible for pensions was 25 officers, 168 non-commissioned officers and privates. The minimum qualification for a pension is 12 years' service. If you are not pensionable you are not eligible for a gratuity. This only applies to people who have made their careers from service in our forces. As we know, at the moment our forces are stretched to the limit of their capacity. There is a big recruiting drive on. I feel that it is up to us to see that the single men and single officers should be treated well and that the Army should be made an attractive career for them. There should not be this anomaly between single men and their married colleagues when it comes to payment of the resettlement gratuity.

Mr. Gallanagh

I will not detain the House long. I just met a fellow-Senator downstairs and he said to me: "I suppose I will have to go up and say a few words on this." I replied: "I suppose you had better in case John Mulcahy gets a hold of you and writes that you did not. You might not get as near to him as one of the subeditors that the Irish Independent got to answer his question. However, McAnthony might get at you in one of the two wrong months.”

My regret is that after 12 years of preparation for entry into the Common Market we should go in under such a cloud, due to the troubles in the North. Being a Northerner, I regret this. I should like to counteract a statement made here yesterday when a Senator accused Deputy Lynch of being feeble, and his Ministers' contributions of being vague. The Senator stated that apart from the Taoiseach and three of his Ministers the rest of the Ministers had been dumb. One of the greatest troubles in the North stems from the fact that not enough of the so-called Northern leaders have been dumb enough.

Through the troubled years in Northern Ireland every time we listened to news bulletins or interviews we were forced to listen to the views of every member of almost every party in the North of Ireland. Someone spoke for the Government party here. The same applied to the Labour Party in the Republic. They had more voices than they had seats. Too many voices have been a cause of the troubles in the North of Ireland. I am glad to learn today that the hard crust of the Unionist Party has broken in so far as they have advocated that these brutal and unChristian assassinations which have been taking place should stop. As a native of Buncrana, County Donegal, I was shocked by the brutal murder of a young courting couple. This couple were engaged to be married. I know the parents of the young man who received six bullet wounds and three stab wounds. His fianceé received four bullet wounds and three stab wounds. I say to those on this side of the Border who are advocating violence that they, too, must bear some responsibility for these brutal assassinations. If they had listened to the voices of their leaders who are democratically elected here these things would not have happened.

I should like to refer to unemployment and emigration. We hear little of emigration today because there is no emigration of necessity. Emigration is voluntary today.

The word "unemployment" is often used and we are greeted with this business of statistics. Recently I attended a meeting in Bray where the trade unionists and other bodies told us that in the Bray area there were 700 unemployed. The Bray area extends from Roundwood to Shankill and we were told there was an unemployment figure of 700. Yet the industrialists present there could tell us and prove to us on paper that on visiting the local labour exchange there were only 13 girls and 42 men available for employment. The remainder of the figures presented as being unemployed are either unemployed through sickness or because they do not want work, or they may be young mothers rearing a baby, or about to have a baby who are drawing unemployment benefit to which they are entitled because of the stamps for which they paid over the years.

We hear a great deal about the inefficiency of motorists and the great damage done by them but we hear little of the obligations of the pedestrian. The Minister for Local Government should bring their obligations to the notice of pedestrians through television or otherwise. The type of pedestrian crossing marked only by a flashing light is dangerous. Children and others feel they have a right to cross, irrespective of any dangers. All pedestrian crossings should be marked distinctively by red and green lights. The Minister should bring their obligations to the notice of pedestrians.

Mr. Honan

I should like to move the adjournment of this debate. I do not know if it is appropriate to do it this way. I should like to move the adjournment of this debate. I know there are Bills to be discussed.

An Cathaoirleach

Will the Senator bear with me for a moment? It is now seven and a half minutes to 5 o'clock. The Senators should decide what they intend to do.

Mr. Honan

I was going to move the adjournment of this debate without determining what would be taken at the next sitting.

Mr. Keery

I understand there is general agreement that we adjourn this debate at 5 o'clock and meet on Wednesday next to deal with the legislation in hand and then complete the discussion on the Appropriation Act on Thursday morning.

Mr. W. O'Brien

Will the Minister be available on Thursday morning?

An Cathaoirleach

Is the House agreed on that? It is now six minutes to 5 o'clock. Should we adjourn now or wait until 5 o'clock.

Mr. Honan

We should adjourn now.

Mr. Butler

I should like to speak. I will confine my remarks this evening to agriculture. On looking at the leaving certificate results for 1972, I was shocked to realise that out of 11,460 boys who sat for this examination and 12,703 girls only a total of 605 boys and eight girls took agricultural science. This was a great shock to me when I read the results of the leaving certificate. We are entering the EEC and we have been led to believe that we will be basing the economics of this country on the produce of agriculture. The influence of the Department of Finance on the financing of agriculture will be diminished in the EEC.

Out of 24,000 18-year olds doing the leaving certificate only 613 did the agricultural science paper. This means that the remaining boys and girls did not consider agricultural science as a subject in which an examination should be done. This is a disgraceful situation when we consider that these boys and girls are not being taught this subject in school. Maybe we have not got sufficiently qualified teachers to teach agricultural science in the secondary schools.

We must make ourselves interested in agriculture. We must know what is happening and the only way we can do this is to educate our children. They will be carrying the burdens of this State in future years. The people doing leaving certificate now are between the ages of 16 and 18 years; they will have votes at the next election. We will be telling them from campaigning platforms what agriculture means to the State. The only education about agriculture they are getting is what they read in the papers or see on television. Only 50 hours of television time was given to agriculture in the year. We could not learn very much in that length of time from Telefís Éireann. What we are getting on agriculture from Telefís Éireann is good. Most of us are away from time to time and probably on average see only 20 hours of that 50 hours. I do not see that we could learn much on agriculture in 20 hours in a year.

Out of the total number of boys studying agricultural science only 213 did the higher paper, and only 89 boys got 55 per cent of the marks in the examination. If there was anybody from any other country listening to me and realising the situation we are in as far as the education of our boys and girls in agricultural science is concerned I am sure he would be as shocked as I am. A total of 96 boys received 40-55 per cent of the marks in the examination which showed they had average knowledge. Only 28 boys got less than 40 per cent.

We all know that the women of today are looking for equality. Only six girls out of 12,703 took the honours agricultural paper in the leaving certificate examination. One got honours— 55 per cent; another got 40-55 per cent; and four failed. What are the women thinking about at all? Surely we have a vast number of ladies in agriculture and yet we can only get one girl to get honours in agricultural science in the leaving certificate in 1972.

As regards the pass paper, 392 boys did the agricultural science examination and only 17 of them got 55 per cent or more marks. Also, 196 of those received less than 40 per cent and failed the examination in the lower grade.

An Cathaoirleach

At this stage I should like to point out to the Senator and to the House that it is past 5 o'clock, so we will adjourn.

Mr. Butler

I will refer to the girls. Two girls in the whole of Ireland took the lower grade in agricultural science in the leaving certificate and both failed.

An Cathaoirleach

Cherchez la femme!

The Seanad adjourned at 5 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 24th January, 1973.