I regret to find that the Minister for Finance has not made any attempt to deal with the question of reduction of taxation. I believe that if the Minister had faced up to the problems in a courageous and investigating spirit he could have found means whereby reductions in taxation would be possible. I do not at this stage intend to enter very deeply into the question of possible economies, but I want to say that, despite the assertions that have been made by Ministers and Deputies, I believe that if our request for the setting up of a Commission of Inquiry to go into the different Estimates, the different services, and the different departments of the State had been acceded to it would have been found possible to recommend reductions. In proposing the appointment of such a committee I had no intention of trying to convey to the House that I believed that reductions of such a kind as would mean considerable relief in taxation could have been effected in the salaries of State officials. I have never contended that such is the case, nor do I do so now. But in spite of that, apart from the question of actual economies resulting, apart from the question of what reduction in taxation might be brought about by such investigations, from the point of view of the example which the Government ought to give to the country it would be valuable. I believe that if it is possible to bring about a reduction in the salaries of higher officials the effect on the country would be useful and would help us, who are of opinion that we cannot get the economic conditions that we ought to have until there is a general levelling of the emoluments drawn by officials of the State and of the local boards.
We also feel, in view of the fact that economies have been carried out in other directions—economies have been carried out at the expense of the old age pensioners and at the expense of the workers on the Shannon, and economies have been recommended in different places by the Minister for Local Government—that it is the duty of the Government to make a really serious effort to bring about economies in Departments of State. I do not believe that these economies can be brought about with the present machinery. I do not believe that Ministers themselves have either the time available or the necessary experience for a close examination into the personnel and the organisation of their Departments. When we inherited these services from the British Government it is quite probable that a great many of them were run in an old-fashioned and unwieldly manner, and by careful examination into their organisation and into the methods of coordination amongst them there are possibilities that economies could be brought about, that the system of Government services could be so reorganised that a great amount of red tape and unnecessary work could be eliminated, and that the work could be carried on with a very much more limited staff than at present.
With regard to this question of economies, I am in agreement with the statement by the Minister for Lands and Agriculture. I believe that no really effective economies can be carried out without dealing with questions of policy. I have never maintained otherwise. I believe that the good effect of economies would be largely by way of example, but if we are to have economies which will be a relief that will be felt by the taxpayers we must deal with questions of policy. But I do not agree with the suggestions thrown out by Ministers that this matter of policy must be thrown on the shoulders of members of the Opposition. I maintain that that is not our work. I maintain that the Government itself is responsible for policy and that this suggestion that we should point out to the Government the services which are redundant and which could be eliminated is not the method by which Government should be carried on, or the method by which it is carried on in any State.
Ministers know as well as I do that in finding out matters in that connection, we in the Opposition work under a considerable handicap, for the reason that we are not in close touch with the workings of the different Government Departments. The ordinary Deputy has to deal in a cursory, and sometimes, haphazard manner with problems affecting the different Departments of State, whereas Ministers are in a position to concentrate on their own particular Departments. Therefore, they can know better than the ordinary Deputy whether services or even portions of services, are redundant, and I suggest it is up to Ministers to come forward and say: "We have examined our Departments and believe that, in view of the economic condition of the country, certain services are redundant, certain services which, perhaps, might be necessary in normal times, but which can be done without in the present abnormal condition of the country." Ministers have refused to face this problem and have endeavoured to throw the onus of making suggestions on us. We are going to take up the onus of doing so, and are not going to run away from it. Our suggestions may not all be wise, and they may not all meet with the approval of the House, but wise or unwise, good or bad, it is our intention, and my intention, when the Estimates come before us, to face up to the different problems and to make definite suggestions in regard to how economies can be carried out. The Minister for Finance, in making his Budget statement segregated the Estimates into two lots. One lot dealt with a sum of £19,500,000, and this included such matters as payments for the relief of local rates, old age pensions, police, education, university colleges, the Army, Post Office and revenue, and apparently the suggestion is that no possible economy can be effected in respect of this total sum of £19,000,000 odd. With that suggestion I do not agree, and I am going to point out possible economies which might be effected in regard to some of these items. I do not intend to go very deeply into these matters at this stage, but I will do so later when the Estimates come before us.
